![]() I went into Copernic’s Tools > Options > Files to see what locations the program was indexing. When CDS was done with its initial search, I tried again with that recommended search for This produced many thousands of files. I had just uninstalled and reinstalled it, in a bid to fix its problems, so at this point it was saying, “Initial scan in progress.” I didn’t want to forget about that search, where I had already typed my search terms into the search box, so I hit Windows-C (i.e., hold down the Windows key, on the bottom row of the keyboard, and hit C) to open another session - but, silly me, CDS did not allow multiple sessions. To verify that it was indexing a particular file, I could search for I was going to try that, but I already had CDS running. ![]() That 11-page document said that CDS would always keep an up-to-date index for me. They told me to look at their Quick Start Guide. I didn’t see any advanced search feature on the forum. So I couldn’t use my ordinary approach of repeatedly refining my Google search until I had what I was looking for. As an example, a Google search (for Copernic “scheduled indexing”) that would seemingly have produced hundreds of hits actually only produced four. For one thing, it seemed that people were posting their questions on Copernic’s internal forum - but since access to that forum was available only to registered and logged-in users, the results would not appear in ordinary searches. Searching for answers for these problems was somewhat frustrating. In that last case, when I went into Tools > Indexing Status > Details, I saw “Catastrophic failure,” apparently indicating that CDS had been unable to index the listed file for some unknown reason. It would seem to start, and then it would stop (or, in Copernic lingo, it would become “idle”). I also found that sometimes I could not get Copernic to index files. One was that I could search one day and get plenty of hits, and then I could run the same search another day and get “No matching documents.” Another problem was that a search of a set of files on one machine would display only a few hits, while running the same search of the same files on a mirrored machine would find hundreds. Several different problems arose at about the same time. I was using CDS to search for file contents - especially for text within files. For that purpose, I found it was faster to use Everything. I wasn’t using CDS to search for filenames. Note: these notes are incomplete they ended before I answered all of the questions. This post describes the situation and some solutions. When you punch in a term like “invoice,” you’ll get results in a fraction of a second because the program already knows every file to look in.I was using Copernic Desktop Search (CDS) 3.4.0 on Windows 7 SP1. (Depending on the program, the initial indexing process can sideline your computer for anywhere from 10 minutes to a couple of hours.) This index of your hard disk’s contents gets stored as a compact file or folder that’s optimized for fast access. In simplest terms, a desktop search program works by pre-scanning files on your computer-e-mail messages, Web pages in your browser’s cache, spreadsheets, etc.-and compiling a list of the words and phrases it finds. How’s it possible to make searching through files on your desktop as painless as finding results on the Web? Memorize the contents of the hard drive in advance. If you use the right desktop search application, it’s a snap. You probably won’t find all the Steely Dan songs in your iTunes library or every PDF with the phrase “owner’s manual” using the Windows search. They’re also smarter about sifting through your e-mail, music files, browser history, and other special data formats. Desktop search applications work a lot like the search function that’s already built into the Windows Start Menu, but they’re much quicker.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |