How could one show equal movies by size with different and same name names?

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Wed Jun 06, 2018 11:36 am

How could one show equal movies by size with different and same names?

Post by **therube** » Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:58 pm

sizedupe: video:

Note that that video: is a filter, where sizedupe: returns "global" results, so there may be video(s) listed with no corresponding sized "duplicate video" - because the duplicate sized item is something other then video:.

Post by **NotNull** » Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:52 pm

- Query for video:
- Export the results as an EFU list
- Open that EFU list in Everything
- Query for sizedupe:

Result is a list of all video files that have another video file wih the same size.

- Close the File List to return to your regular Everything.

harryray2 · Post by **harryray2** » Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:57 pm

I don't really get this...I've tried using sizedupe but it shows more or less all the files on the drive, not just the duplicates...with sizedupe on, and searching just my c drive, Everything shows, on my system, 136,478 objects and with it off Everything shows 156,165 objects....Obviously it shows loads of smaller size files which are the same but once the s1ze gets over about 6,000kb it shows all the files not just duplicates.

Now, if I use sizedupe on both my c and d drive it appears to work, reading only about 150,000 files for both drives

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Wed Jun 06, 2018 7:59 pm

Thank you very much!

I have entered this:

The result is ordered by file size:

So I guess I can now find the duplicates by sorting by size.

Obviously there are shown none duplicates as well. Do I miss anything? How could one avoid the none duplicates to be shown?

- Query for video:
- Export the results as an EFU list
- Open that EFU list in Everything
- Query for sizedupe:

I did it like that and it works:

I assume I have to switch the culumn to bytes to be able to check the file sizes exactly. Is there a shortcut to switch between "Auto" and "Bytes"?

But there are many sizes missing:

Why is that?

Many thanks again!

Post by **therube** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 4:18 am

(Same number of bytes does not imply "exactness". It only means - same number of bytes.
If you want to see if two files are exactly the same, if that is what you are after, you can start with same number of bytes, but then you need to do further, like compare the files - byte for byte, or by using a hash [usually sufficient].)

Post by **therube** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 4:54 am

@harryray2

For now, forget about the video: part (& the efu part), simply use sizedupe:.
Then sort your files by Size.
Are there not at least two of each same sized file listed (& regardless of file type) - IOW, "size dupe's".

Now add a filter, say size:>6mb, so sizedupe: size:>6mb.
You have filtered your list, so it should be shorter.
Not that you may have a .doc file, 6mb & also a .mp4, 6mb.
And your .doc may be on C: & your video on D:.
Now if you add a D: filter into your search, so sizedupe: size:>6mb D:.
With that, your .doc on C: should disappear - you have filtered it out.
But the video on D: remains - even though there is no longer any corresponding sized file - listed.
There is a corresponding sized file, though it happens to be on C: & your search says to ignore listing (not finding) files on C:.

Now what NotNull said, using the .efu export, will take some of the inexactness out of the equation. Depending on one's needs, or understanding, that may be of benefit.

What version of Everything are you running?

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:57 am

(Same number of bytes does not imply "exactness". It only means - same number of bytes.
If you want to see if two files are exactly the same, if that is what you are after, you can start with same number of bytes, but then you need to do further, like compare the files - byte for byte, or by using a hash [usually sufficient].)

Yes, sorry, I meant the size of the file to be checked exactly. And yes, I want to check the content of the files finally.

So the only possiblity to show video duplicates is doing it by using an efu list?

Post by **therube** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 12:18 pm

No, the EFU method described only provides you with a more concise listing, with only "video:" files being listed, other sizedupe:'s - those with different file extensions (i.e., !video:) stripped from the listing.

One may work just as well for you as the other, though one may be easier to comprehend.

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 5:09 pm

No, the EFU method described only provides you with a more concise listing, with only "video:" files being listed

This method seems to be the only one working for me. The other ones show many none duplicates.

Thank you very much!

Post by **NotNull** » Sat Jun 09, 2018 4:50 pm

@biff:
1) In your first result list - after querying sizedupe: video: and sorting the results by size - in the first 20 or so results there are no results with the same size!
That would mean that for those files there *is* a file somewhere with the same size, but that is not a video file!

2) I don't know why you there are so many sizes missing when you go the "EFU route". Are the filesizes in the original EFU file? (you can open that file in Notepad or even Excel)

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:11 pm

Since some time I do not get notification e-mails anymore. Or sometimes I get them sometimes I don't.

1) In your first result list - after querying sizedupe: video: and sorting the results by size - in the first 20 or so results there are no results with the same size!
That would mean that for those files there *is* a file somewhere with the same size, but that is not a video file!

What a coincidence. Can Everthing hide those files whose duplicates are filtered / are not video files?

2) I don't know why you there are so many sizes missing when you go the "EFU route". Are the filesizes in the original EFU file? (you can open that file in Notepad or even Excel)

I am not sure, but obviously there are the sizes missing in Notepad and Everything / the efu files, here an example:

In Notepad, the same efu file:

Post by **therube** » Wed Jun 13, 2018 12:08 am

Can Everthing hide those files whose duplicates are filtered / are not video files?

There's a whole discussion, I think in this thread

, where the efu method is discussed.
(And actually, reiterated in another recent thread.)

No file sizes are showing in the .efu.
Is Z: offline?
That's probably not it.
Options | Indexes, is 'Index file size' enabled?

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:21 am

Is Z: offline?

Yes, it is.

Options | Indexes, is 'Index file size' enabled?

Yes it is:

Post by **NotNull** » Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:17 pm

Still a mystery to me why it has no size (and no attributes and no dates).
Maybe this Z:-drive was indexed long ago, with different settings/Everything version before going off-line?
If you search for a couple of those files in Everything itself, are those files showing a date?

Something else you could try is connecting this Z:-drive so that Everything is able to index it (again).
BTW: is this NTFS filesystem or did you use folder indexing?
And: what Everything version?
Just trying to help ...

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:47 pm

Maybe this Z:-drive was indexed long ago, with different settings/Everything version before going off-line?

No, I would not thing so, it is the last drive I bought, the newest, so it should have had the same settings in Everything as the other drives. The most of the files and folders of Z: have a size display, about 1, 2 % or so doesn't.

Something else you could try is connecting this Z:-drive so that Everything is able to index it (again).

Yes, I do it periodically, it is a back up drive.

BTW: is this NTFS filesystem or did you use folder indexing?

It is folder indexing, not shown in NTFS:

And: what Everything version?

The newest:

Yes, thank you very much!

Post by **NotNull** » Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:43 pm

You have checked "Never rescan" for this Z:=drive.
Nothing wrong with that setting, but If the sizes are not in your 'regular' Everything list, consider connecting your Z:-drive and do a "Rescan now" (see picture)
Wait till the scan completes (the highlighted text "Z:\" changes to "Z:\ (rescanning)" during the scan) and disconnect the disk after that.
Does that make a difference? Are the missing sizes gone?

: YpvVWhY.png (17.5 KiB) Viewed 20694 times

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 11:43 am

You have checked "Never rescan" for this Z:=drive.

Yes, that's because (if I remember it right) rescanning the (complete) drive lasts hours or many hours or even longer (a day or more) so Everything would never be able to rescan the drive during the time it is plugged in (because of the file system or so). And that's why "Attempt to monitor changes" is activated to just scan the changes.

Nothing wrong with that setting, but If the sizes are not in your 'regular' Everything list, consider connecting your Z:-drive and do a "Rescan now" (see picture)

The missing sizes are not only from Z: but also from other drives here:

Post by **NotNull** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:09 pm

You should be able to fix that T:-drive by enabling the Enable USN Journal for that disk (and any other NTFS disk).

Thing is that Everything probably already missed a lot of changes that are no longer in the USN Journal, so you have to take some extra steps to get it 'in sync' again:

Connect your T:-drive
Under Menu:Tools > Options > Indexes > NTFS, select your T:-drive
Uncheck Include in database for this T:-drive
Click Apply
Check Include in database
Check Enable USN Journal
Check Monitor changes
Click OK
Done

Rescanning T: should not take longer than a minute

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:01 pm

Many thanks!

You should be able to fix that T:-drive by enabling the Enable USN Journal for that disk (and any other NTFS disk).

Why fix it? Is there anything broken? USN Journal is unchecked for all of the drives. What is it good for?

Thing is that Everything probably already missed a lot of changes

Why? Each time a drive is plugged in it seems to be rescanned.

Post by **NotNull** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:59 am

Biff wrote:Many thanks!

You should be able to fix that T:-drive by enabling the Enable USN Journal for that disk (and any other NTFS disk).
Why fix it? Is there anything broken? USN Journal is unchecked for all of the drives. What is it good for?

Thing is that Everything probably already missed a lot of changes
Why? Each time a drive is plugged in it seems to be rescanned.

Ahh, you are right! If you enabled "Montor changes" for a NTFS volume, it will implicitly enable the USN Journal
The reading the USN journal is Everything's way to keep up with changes on that disk.

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 5:18 pm

Ahh, you are right! If you enabled "Montor changes" for a NTFS volume, it will implicitly enable the USN Journal

Thank godness! But unfortunately

The reading the USN journal is Everything's way to keep up with changes on that disk.

The Z drive has this file system, so it is more difficult to keep up the volumes, scanning lasts much longer:

And above all Everything does not scan automatically when the drive is plugged in.

Post by **NotNull** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 7:15 pm

Let's summarize first, as there are a lot of open ends in this thread.

Original question:
How could one show equal movies by size with different and same names?
There were 2 suggestions how to get this done. One - involving an EFU file - brought to light that your files are not completely indexed.
This happens on NTFS-indexed disks, as well as on Folder-indexed disks (they use different scanning techniques).

IMO that is something that has to be fixed first, as I think the EFU-way is the only 100% accurate method to get what you want.
(you want the index to be accurate anyway (at least in my opinion))

Subquestion:
I assume I have to switch the culumn to bytes to be able to check the file sizes exactly. Is there a shortcut to switch between "Auto" and "Bytes"?
(this question is unanswered)

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Wed Jun 27, 2018 9:56 pm

There were 2 suggestions how to get this done. One - involving an EFU file - brought to light that your files are not completely indexed.

Yes, there obviousy are also single files not indeded on one or more drvies which are not found when searching, did not notice that before. I do not know since when this happens.

IMO that is something that has to be fixed first, as I think the EFU-way is the only 100% accurate method to get what you want.
(you want the index to be accurate anyway (at least in my opinion))

Yes, yes, of course. And yes, the EFU-way seems to be the only one bringing the correct results.

Post by **NotNull** » Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:06 pm

Well then, First step: fixing your T:-drive.
As it is monitored, the steps above can be simplified:

Connect your T:-drive
Under Menu:Tools > Options > Indexes > NTFS, select your T:-drive
Uncheck Include in database for this T:-drive
Click Apply
Check Include in database
Click OK
Done

Is the missing information now included in Everything?

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:51 pm

But why just fixing T:? There does not seem to be missing information.

May be it is only Z: having the missing data. May be because of that file system.

Post by **NotNull** » Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:59 pm

Biff wrote:But why just fixing T:? There does not seem to be missing information.

It's a first step and we have to start somewhere ..
I choose your T: drive as it should be the easiest one. And you said:

Biff wrote: The missing sizes are not only from Z: but also from other drives here:

(posting2.php?mode=quote&f=5&p=22397#pr22339)

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Thu Jun 28, 2018 10:09 pm

Alright. I understand. Thank you.

So it is done for T: now. To find those elements with missing information the only thing I need to do is just to sort them by the different columns so the elements with missing informations would be on the top or at the bottom of that column, I assume.

And I should do it for each single drive in the same way, I guess. I will do it then.

Post by **NotNull** » Thu Jun 28, 2018 10:22 pm

Biff wrote:Alright. I understand. Thank you.

So it is done for T: now. To find those elements with missing information the only thing I need to do is just to sort them by the different columns so the elements with missing informations would be on the top or at the bottom of that column, I assume.

Correct.

And I should do it for each single drive in the same way, I guess. I will do it then.

[/quote]
Maybe check for missing information first? If there is nothing missing, there is no need to re-scan.
Easiest way I can think of (right now) is entering drive: in the search bar (for example T: or W:) file: in the searchbar and sort each column increasing and decreasing (clck on the column header to sort it one way; click again to sort it the other way).
If there are empty fields for some files on top of that column, connect the drive(s) where those files are on and follow the steps like you did for your T:-drive.

EDIT: Suggestion: When you are done with all disks that needed updating, exit Everything so that the updated database is safely written to disk.

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Thu Jun 28, 2018 10:43 pm

Maybe check for missing information first? If there is nothing missing, there is no need to re-scan.

Yes. Done, in the way you explained and in others. No missing data anymore. Strange, I only had "fixed" T: having had no missing data obviously. Where did the missing information come from suddenly?

Post by **NotNull** » Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:52 pm

That's good news!

Does that also mean that an EFU export now *does* include filesizes, etc?

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:24 pm

Yes, it does. Any idea why.

Post by **therube** » Wed Jul 04, 2018 10:49 am

(I believe certain exports defaulted to particular data, but when certain other data was specifically indexed, that too would then be exported.)

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Wed Jul 04, 2018 11:31 am

Hmmm, yes, OK, thank you.

Post by **NotNull** » Wed Jul 04, 2018 3:03 pm

Biff wrote:Any idea why.

I have no idea. I thought this was going to be a long and hard battle to get things right. Never expected that connecting your T:-drive would fix the Z:-drive

@therube: interesting! Thought this was only when using ES.exe (the command-line tool)?

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Wed Jul 04, 2018 5:02 pm

I have no idea. I thought this was going to be a long and hard battle to get things right. Never expected that connecting your T:-drive would fix the Z:-drive

Yes, may be I made a mistake or such, I do not know. Do those settings mean, that all new files will get into the index / will be scanned respectively that all files on Z: will be in the catalog / be indexed? And does that mean there are files in the index being not existing on Z: anymore:

?

Post by **NotNull** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:48 pm

Biff wrote: Do those settings mean, that all new files will get into the index / will be scanned respectively that all files on Z: will be in the catalog / be indexed? And does that mean there are files in the index being not existing on Z: anymore:
?

You have configured "Attempt to monitor changes" for this Z:-drive.
That means that when Everything is running, it will attempt to detect changes made to that disk.
In my experience, Everything does a very good job and detects all changes. But it's not guaranteed.
Furthermore: if you connect this (extrenal) disk to another computer and then add/delete/move files on this disk, Everything on your main computer has no knowledge of that and will be 'out of sync'.

So, if you use this disk only on this single computer and your Everything is always running, you're probably good.
Nevertheless, I think it is a good idea to a "Rescan now" once in a while (let's say once a week). Just to be sure.

You currently are folder-indexing Z:\ as well as Z:\Filme. Probably an experiment, as this will cause all files and folders in Z:\Flme to be included twice in the list (*) and thus cause duplicates by default (that was your original question

)

(*) I thought this was different in older versions; I'll do some experiments this weekemnd.

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:31 pm

Many thanks! Alright, I understand.

You currently are folder-indexing Z:\ as well as Z:\Filme. Probably an experiment, as this will cause all files and folders in Z:\Flme to be included twice in the list (*) and thus cause duplicates by default (that was your original question )

Yes, I have added "Filme" separately because a single folder is very much faster (re)scanned, the other files or the most of them is backed up, so not that important to have in the index. Yes, a drawback they are listed twice.

(*) I thought this was different in older versions; I'll do some experiments this weekemnd

Ah, that's great, very excied to get to know.

Many thanks again.

Post by **NotNull** » Sat Jul 07, 2018 4:10 pm

NotNull wrote: (*) I thought this was different in older versions; I'll do some experiments this weekemnd.

No, I remembered wrong .. Tested with versions 1.4.1.768 (oldest 1.4 version available) and 1.4.1.877 (first non-beta version).
Both vrsions show the files twice; one from Z:\ and one from Z:\Filme.

Sorry for giving you false hope. (although there are also other reasons why you shouldn't go back to an older version)

Biff · Post by **Biff** » Sat Jul 07, 2018 5:10 pm

No, no, no reason to say sorry.

I could exclude Z:/Filme from the search (not from the indexing). Or the other (backed up) files on that drive.

Many thanks for testing.