Forum Posts Feed
Large databases in UltraRecall?
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Chris Thompson
Aug 28, 2010 at 12:38 AM
Has anyone had any experience with storing large (10,000+) collections of documents in UR? Most of the documents would be PDF documents. Some of the posts on the UR forum seem to suggest that the database file can become unwieldy if UR is allowed to index the text of PDF documents, but it seems to me that turning this off would be a fairly big compromise.
(Normally I’d use DevonThink for this type of thing, but my current project has to use a Windows tool.)
—Chris
Posted by quant
Aug 28, 2010 at 07:46 PM
Don’t know the answer to your question as I try to minimize the amount of “not important” info in my UR databases. The reason is, that UR won’t be able to come even close to what dedicated search/indexing soft can provide. On the other hand, if I need to only link the files to some othe items, add tags etc, there’s no need to index files themselves.
Can I ask what for do you want to put so many files into (indexed) database?
Posted by Thomas
Aug 28, 2010 at 10:14 PM
I remember I had some problems getting my pdf files indexed in UltraRecall. That was long ago, and I believe it wasn’t solved at that time, Kinook were using third party engine for that. But if you are going to rely on the indexing I’d recommend to testing it with few large PDF files whether it indexes them all.
As quant points out, I also moved my pdf’s from database and got them indexed by Archivarius 3000, but I only needed indexing not the extra features UR provides thus that made the move easy.
Posted by Alexander Deliyannis
Aug 29, 2010 at 10:16 AM
Is there a reason other than indexing, for actually importing (embedding) the files into UltraRecall? If not, I would opt for Archivarius too, as I have done.
As I understand:
- UltraRecall only indexes PDF that are imported; if they are only linked to as external files, they are not indexed. I may be wrong. If I am, then there should be no trouble in terms of the database size.
- If files are imported, the database file becomes huge; this is not just for UltraRecall, but any other program. The size of the database will probably be significantly greater than the sum of the sizes of the individual files. With 10.000 files, even if they are simple text with limited graphics, you are bound to run into performance problems, even solely from the database file’s fragmentation in the hard disk.
Posted by quant
Aug 29, 2010 at 01:44 PM
yes, there is a reason, to have the files with you in your database, so that when you move it say to your usb key, you know you’re going to have access to all the files that you imported to it.
Also, the files are indexed not according to whether they are linked or stored, but according to whether given file extention is set to index.
Alexander Deliyannis wrote:
>Is there a reason other than indexing, for actually importing (embedding) the files
>into UltraRecall? If not, I would opt for Archivarius too, as I have done.
>
>As I
>understand:
>
>- UltraRecall only indexes PDF that are imported; if they are only
>linked to as external files, they are not indexed. I may be wrong. If I am, then there
>should be no trouble in terms of the database size.
>
>- If files are imported, the
>database file becomes huge; this is not just for UltraRecall, but any other program.
>The size of the database will probably be significantly greater than the sum of the
>sizes of the individual files. With 10.000 files, even if they are simple text with
>limited graphics, you are bound to run into performance problems, even solely from
>the database file’s fragmentation in the hard disk.