Page 1 of 1

Beta 2 doesnt permanently delete after extract

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:51 am
by RBBPR
Tryd the setting to permanently delete the files after its extracted.
But i see its still in the RecycleBin unfortunately.

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:01 pm
by Smudge
Known issue since b1. It is designed that way until it is perfected just in case it deleted files by mistake. It will be fixed before the final version is released.

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:09 am
by grimlock72
Since beta2 still removes non-rar files even though it CLEARLY can't and hasn't extracted files from those files.. I rather prefer to keep it in non-permanent-delete mode. The non-rar logic of R&E is faulty and needs fixing first.

Why NL deletes downloaded files from which nothing was extracted I have no idea. If *I* run 'unrar AreYouLonesome.mp3' I get an error as expected, so NL should be able to handle that, by simply aborting any further processing.

At the moment what it does is:

- download small par2 file
- download non par2 files
- check against par2 file, download blocks if needed
- once par2 checks ok, run unrar on all files it has downloaded
- if nothing was extracted it wants to move the files, lord knows WHY 'cos it doesn't do that (nor should it) for normal rar/par2 sets.
- it then lazyily removes all files listed in the par2 set, without checking if those files were ever moved to a DIFFERENT directory

That part of R&E assumes that extraction-dir != destanation-dir but doesn't either CHECK that nor enforce it. With the above resulting error.

So lets keep the files in the recycle bin for now.

the latter being silly.

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:39 pm
by Hecks
Edit: I see you've pointed out in the stickied thread the obvious fact about making sure download and extract directories are never the same.

-Hecks

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:37 pm
by grimlock72
Hecks wrote:Edit: I see you've pointed out in the stickied thread the obvious fact about making sure download and extract directories are never the same.

-Hecks
Ermm.. I rather not keep seperate directories really. But NL should make a choice about it; either check they ARE seperate or don't do the copy/delete step when they are the same. One or the other, can't have both ;-)

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:56 pm
by Hecks
grimlock72 wrote:
Hecks wrote:Edit: I see you've pointed out in the stickied thread the obvious fact about making sure download and extract directories are never the same.

-Hecks
Ermm.. I rather not keep seperate directories really. But NL should make a choice about it; either check they ARE seperate or don't do the copy/delete step when they are the same. One or the other, can't have both ;-)
You're right, NL should be fixed. :)

But there's every reason to keep download & destination folders separate and on different drives: 1) it's far far quicker to write between drives, especially if the download drive also holds the temp folders 2) it prevents the horrible amounts of disk fragmentation that you get with archive downloads. The latter is especially important when dealing with large media files. You really don't want to be downloading many fragmented archive parts to a drive, then extracting the same amount of data in between the fragments, then deleting the archives, leaving you with even more fragmentation than you started with.

This is such a common practice that I'm sure Spiril must have assumed everyone did this when he was testing, and neglected to think of the rest.

-Hecks

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 7:17 pm
by grimlock72
Yeah, trouble is there are downloads which are NOT par2 at all and I want THOSE in the 'downloaded' directory. I wouldn't mind having only par2 sets and part files downloaded to a temp dir, as long as I get my 'usable' downloaded files in one dir :)

Got to think about that one some more, the different disk setup definitly has advantages.

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:18 pm
by Taomyn
Hecks wrote: But there's every reason to keep download & destination folders separate and on different drives:
-Hecks
Yeah if you're lucky enough to have more than one physical drive, even more difficult for us laptop owners. Remember multiple volumes do not help, only physical drives make an diffence and then only for copies.

Single drives (and a single colume) have the advantage that a move is by far quicker than multiple drives or volumes (seconds as opposed to minutes). NL needs to be flexible and allow us to choose what we want or it will be unbalanced for one sector of users.

I suspect at the moment that NL is copying then deleting rather than moving especially when deleting to the Recyle Bin as my laptop (single drive single volume) grinds to a halt when it's finished extracting.

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:37 am
by Hecks
Even separate partitions on a single drive should improve performance quite a bit, because then at least the data is better organised, and fragmentatiion is kept to a minimum. It also means that you can set a small cluster size on the Windows partition (4 KB) and large clusters on the partition holding the media files (64 KB) for greater efficiency, and you can use different Recycle Bin and System Restore settings for each partition. Defragmenting the drive and performing other such system tasks is also a lot easier this way. I'd also recommend installing something like QSoft's RAMDisk and caching your files here, so that article parts are decoded and combined entirely in RAM before being written to the drive. This speeds things up nicely.

-Hecks