Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

All suggestions about TPFC should be posted here. Discussions about changes to TPFC will also be carried out here.
Message
Author
portman
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:55 am

Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#1 Post by portman » Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:13 am

Please consider adding the option to sort results in the database by Size (uncompressed) (Smallest first). Currently the options available to sort by are, Most recent first and Most popular first :D Thanks!

abc
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:01 am

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#2 Post by abc » Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:59 pm

Well.. this could be useful if you're looking at a specific category e.g. "Text - Editors".

freakazoid
Posts: 922
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 5:45 pm

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#3 Post by freakazoid » Sun Aug 19, 2012 7:37 pm

I agree that this would be nice as I often find myself wanting the smallest filesize for an app first.
is it stealth? ;)

User avatar
bærbart
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#4 Post by bærbart » Mon Aug 20, 2012 12:32 am

Looking at a category of apps (as abc mentions above), it would be helpful to sort by other criteria, and uncompressed size would be high on my list. :)

I could see the criteria expanded, and made into something like a drop down list (to save space):

  • Sort by

- Most recent
- Most popular
- Uncompressed size
- Unicode
- Stealth
- etc


Mentioned this in the "design" discussion as well, as it also involves design, but likely more appropriate here.

__philippe
Posts: 470
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:09 am

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#5 Post by __philippe » Fri Jul 05, 2013 2:50 am

Another vote for this query.
Is there any current plan to implement this "Sort by app size" function?

Given multiple apps with equivalent functionalities, I tend to favor the more compact one.
"Sort-by-Size" would be very handy for quickly vetting the "smallest sized apps" returned by a query in the "ALL" software categories.

Thanks,

__philippe

User avatar
shuunen
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:41 am

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#6 Post by shuunen » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:42 am

+1 vote for sort options ! :D

xor
Posts: 105
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 11:02 pm

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#7 Post by xor » Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 pm

+1 vote here too to be able to sort by UNCOMPRESSED SIZE plus as I mentioned a while back I would love to see (~Memory Footprint) aside or below the Uncompressed Size so as to be able to compare performance of tiny apps which results in nimbleness and productivity.

__philippe
Posts: 470
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:09 am

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#8 Post by __philippe » Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:55 am

Another dormant request rearing its pesky head yet again..."Sort DB Search Results by uncompressed Size"

DB search results usually include multiple likely candidate apps.

Given multiple apps with equivalent functionalities, I tend to favor the more compact one.
"Sort-by-Size" would be very handy for quickly vetting the "smallest sized apps" returned, for instance,
by a query for a specific software Category .

The idea would be to add a new "Sort by (Argument)" option alongside the existing
"Search results" "Newer first | Compact View | Display n entries" header line.

The potential Sort argument could be any of :
  • "Size uncompressed" (sum total of distro package unpacked elements)
  • "Date Released"
  • "PE executable(s) size" (yet to-be-defined)
  • "Memory footprint size" (yet to-be-defined)
This new "Sort by" function has been suggested before by a couple of members (well...seven, actually... :wink: ),
but I wonder whether unforeseen implementation ramifications do perhaps make this request decidedly impracticable, in view of the modest benefits expected ?

User avatar
Andrew Lee
Posts: 2208
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#9 Post by Andrew Lee » Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:28 pm

but I wonder whether unforeseen implementation ramifications do perhaps make this request decidedly impracticable, in view of the modest benefits expected ?
It's the latter. :D I just hate everything-but-the-kitchen-sink approach to options. Who else thinks this is a great idea?

__philippe
Posts: 470
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:09 am

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#10 Post by __philippe » Fri Mar 24, 2017 4:04 am

Doctor's opinion :
  • Diagnosis:      acute case of creeping optionitis
  • Prognosis:      potential contagious propagation within whole community
  • Prescription: isolate patient, sedate with one-shot "sort-by-size-uncompressed" placebo injection

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4120
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#11 Post by Midas » Fri Mar 24, 2017 5:44 am

Andrew Lee wrote:Who else thinks this is a great idea?
  • You can add me. I usually follow the same line of reasoning so well expounded by __philippe in my fumblings... :)

__philippe
Posts: 470
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:09 am

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#12 Post by __philippe » Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:34 am

Ahem...

"Sort-by-App-Size" new field request status: "in limbo"... :cry:

How about, instead, a relatively painless-to-implement, inconspicuous workaround :
    ADD the DB's internal current field "Size(in bytes)" as a new column to the TPFC dump structure, which currently lacks such a field ?

I, for one, wouldn't mind tinkering now and then with the ensuing "enhanced" tpfc.CSV's...;-)

User avatar
Andrew Lee
Posts: 2208
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#13 Post by Andrew Lee » Mon Apr 03, 2017 7:03 pm

__philippe wrote:Ahem...

"Sort-by-App-Size" new field request status: "in limbo"... :cry:

How about, instead, a relatively painless-to-implement, inconspicuous workaround :
    ADD the DB's internal current field "Size(in bytes)" as a new column to the TPFC dump structure, which currently lacks such a field ?

I, for one, wouldn't mind tinkering now and then with the ensuing "enhanced" tpfc.CSV's...;-)
As you wish, done!

User avatar
SYSTEM
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:19 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#14 Post by SYSTEM » Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:22 pm

Andrew Lee wrote:
__philippe wrote:Ahem...

"Sort-by-App-Size" new field request status: "in limbo"... :cry:

How about, instead, a relatively painless-to-implement, inconspicuous workaround :
    ADD the DB's internal current field "Size(in bytes)" as a new column to the TPFC dump structure, which currently lacks such a field ?

I, for one, wouldn't mind tinkering now and then with the ensuing "enhanced" tpfc.CSV's...;-)
As you wish, done!
The dump script now produces invalid CSV. The double-quote character is missing at the end of the size field.
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 11th playlist: January 26, 2018

__philippe
Posts: 470
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:09 am

Re: Sort Database by Uncompressed Size of App

#15 Post by __philippe » Tue Apr 04, 2017 2:55 am

Andrew Lee wrote: As you wish, done!
@Andrew
Wow ! That's customer service indeed ! Image

Cheers ! (and please also see comments to SYSTEM's post)

Post Reply