Cache maintainance: sortable columns & include/exclude l

[jonet]

Hi,

Here're my suggestions for improving thumb cache maintainability:

1. The easy way: make the cache list sortable on columns. With this it'll be much easier to locate and multi-select unwanted caches (e.g. cached temporary download folders) and remove with single click.

2. The once-and-for-all solution: Use include/exclude lists to allow user difine which folders (and their subfolders) should be cached, which should not. No unwanted caches will be generated in the first place. So it will be all up to users to setup, not for Pierre to worry about any more.

[Kichiku]

1. The easy way: make the cache list sortable on columns. With this it'll be much easier to locate and multi-select unwanted caches (e.g. cached temporary download folders) and remove with single click.

I need sortable columns too,
my images are located in more than 300 folders,
to select caches to remove is not easy.

[jonet]

I need sortable columns too,
my images are located in more than 300 folders,
to select caches to remove is not easy.

Yes. Without sortable columns the only practical cache maintainance I can do for now is "remove all".

And as I have about 450,000 pics in some 6,000 folders, I find only some of them need to be cached -- the vector collections, some large folders which contain hundreds or thousands of pics. Most folders do not need to be cached. They usually contain no more than 50 pics and are not browsed frequently. And the thumbs will be generated quickly enough when I browse into them any way.

With include and exclude lists I can use no more than 20 entries to difine the desired caching behavior. And that will save up at least 4000 folders from being unnecessarily cached.

In case some users or sometimes one would like to cache everything, just make the use of include/exclude lists optional and everybody will be happy.

Some right-click menu integration into the browser, like "Cache this folder" / "Do not cache this folder", would also be helpful.

[helmut]

A reasonable request with a reasonable explanation. I support both of your suggestions - especially sorting is really needed.

[jonet]

A reasonable request with a reasonable explanation. I support both of your suggestions - especially sorting is really needed.

Thank you helmut. I look forward to seeing it in the future releases. XnView rocks!

[helmut]

A reasonable request with a reasonable explanation. I support both of your suggestions - especially sorting is really needed.

Thank you helmut. I look forward to seeing it in the future releases. XnView rocks!

Please do not expect too much: Pierre is the sole author of XnView. Pierre does listen to what I say and reads what I write, but it's no guarantee that something is implemented.

[jonet]

Thank you. I understand and I wish all the best to you and Pierre and XnView. Cheers.

[chronon]

I just registered to post my support for this request I would really really like to have a exclusion list for image caching.

[bravd]

I also support this...

[Dreamer]

2. The once-and-for-all solution: Use include/exclude lists to allow user difine which folders (and their subfolders) should be cached, which should not. No unwanted caches will be generated in the first place. So it will be all up to users to setup, not for Pierre to worry about any more.

I support this one! At least the ini option, e.g.:

-cacheinclude D:\Pictures
-cacheexclude D:\Music
-cacheexclude E:\

All subfolders should be used for these options. If there will be 2 folders, e.g.:

-cacheinclude D:\Pictures
-cacheexclude D:\Pictures\Temp

...then all files in the folder Pictures should be cached, except the subfolder Temp.

I think this option would be very useful.

[ckit]

I support this request too!