<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
<channel>
<title>FileSeek RSS: Performance issues</title>
<atom:link href="https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/RSS/?TopicID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
<link>https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/RSS/?TopicID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5</link>
<description>FileSeek RSS: Performance issues</description>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 16:37:15 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<language>en</language>
<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<generator>https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/RSS/?TopicID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5</generator>
<item>
<title>RE: Performance issues</title>
<link>https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/View/performance-issues/?ID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5#3</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:46:03 GMT</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Binary Fortress Software</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/View/performance-issues/?ID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5#3</guid>
<category>FileSeek</category>
<description><![CDATA[FileSeek 3.0 Beta 1 (http://www.fileseek.ca/Download/Beta/) is now available, and we've added multi-threading and done some other optimizations where possible. Hopefully it will help the performance on your setup as well!
Thanks!]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="CTDiscussions">
FileSeek 3.0 Beta 1 (http://www.fileseek.ca/Download/Beta/) is now available, and we've added multi-threading and done some other optimizations where possible. Hopefully it will help the performance on your setup as well!<br/>
<br/>
Thanks!
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>RE: Performance issues</title>
<link>https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/View/performance-issues/?ID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5#2</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:41:39 GMT</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Binary Fortress Software</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/View/performance-issues/?ID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5#2</guid>
<category>FileSeek</category>
<description><![CDATA[Thanks for doing the performance testing! That info is definitely helpful and much appreciated.
There may not be much of a way to increase the disk performance, as the 70MB/s would be based around a large continuous file transfer as opposed to tens of thousands of small reads that require more o...]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="CTDiscussions">
Thanks for doing the performance testing! That info is definitely helpful and much appreciated.<br/>
<br/>
There may not be much of a way to increase the disk performance, as the 70MB/s would be based around a large continuous file transfer as opposed to tens of thousands of small reads that require more overhead. We'll still look into it though as we always like to take the opportunity to increase performance.<br/>
<br/>
We'll definitely look into the CPU performance as well to see if there's a way we can improve it.<br/>
<br/>
I'll be sure to let you know if we need anything tested, as it sounds like your disk structure is a good way to stress the program <img src="https://www.fileseek.ca/MediaCommon/SVGs/FontAwesome/face-smile.light.svg" alt=":)" style="box-sizing:border-box;position:relative;overflow:hidden;vertical-align:middle !important;width:16px;height:16px;" HelpButtonData=":)" HelpButtonDataAlign="BelowMiddle" /><br/>
<br/>
Thanks!
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title>Performance issues</title>
<link>https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/View/performance-issues/?ID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:39:06 GMT</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Binary Fortress Software</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.fileseek.ca/Discussions/View/performance-issues/?ID=b4b66783-da2b-4220-97f9-5c7962d739d5</guid>
<category>FileSeek</category>
<description><![CDATA[Overall, FileSeek looks like a pretty slick tool.  However, I do have two performance related questions/suggestions. My D: disk has 40,000 subdirectories. It takes FileSeek ~1minute (with an empty query) to find all files "foo.*". However, the Windows command 'DIR /S foo.*" only takes 5 seconds. ...]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="CTDiscussions">
Overall, FileSeek looks like a pretty slick tool.  However, I do have two performance related questions/suggestions. My D: disk has 40,000 subdirectories. It takes FileSeek ~1minute (with an empty query) to find all files "foo.*". However, the Windows command 'DIR /S foo.*" only takes 5 seconds. The CPU utilization for FileSeek was 8% on a 12 CPU system (i.e. 100% on one CPU). Perhaps this is due to updating the "Current" text box? If so, perhaps updating the progress could be made an option, or done less frequently (say, 4 times a second).  Also, I noticed that accessing the disk seems a little slow (3MB per second rather than the 70MB that the disk is capable of). This seems to be a semaphore related issue, as the CPU is not being maxed out either.  If this code is written in Microsoft C or C++, have you considered using the *_nolock() versions of getc() etc. found in the Microsoft stdio.h file? This can increase your disk I/O performance by 4x or more.
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>