J
JD
Is there a recommended maximum number (or size) of files in a folder or
sub-folder? Is 500 too many?
sub-folder? Is 500 too many?
M
Mark L. Ferguson
No, The root folder is limited, but no other.
B
Big_Al
And that limitation may only be in Fat32 not NTFS.Mark said:
J
JS
FAT 32 has a max of: 65,534
NTFS has a max of: 4,294,967,295
I'm think you also said you renamed these file in an earlier post, so this
might help
Click 'Start' then 'Search'.
Then pick 'All files and folders'.
Next: In the 'All or part of the file name:' field, type: "thumbs.db"
(without the quotes)
In the 'Look in:' field, select only the drive (usually C
letter where
your folders/pictures or files are stored.
Next click the 'More advanced options' button and check the 'Search hidden
files and folders'
and 'Search sub-folders' options.
Now click on the 'Search' button located in the bottom right corner.
When search has completed, highlight all the thumbs.db files, right click
and select 'Delete'.
Now reboot your PC and Windows will build a new set of thumbs.db files, one
for each folder that you selected 'Thumbnail view'.
See if this speed things up.
JS
NTFS has a max of: 4,294,967,295
I'm think you also said you renamed these file in an earlier post, so this
might help
Click 'Start' then 'Search'.
Then pick 'All files and folders'.
Next: In the 'All or part of the file name:' field, type: "thumbs.db"
(without the quotes)
In the 'Look in:' field, select only the drive (usually C
letter whereyour folders/pictures or files are stored.
Next click the 'More advanced options' button and check the 'Search hidden
files and folders'
and 'Search sub-folders' options.
Now click on the 'Search' button located in the bottom right corner.
When search has completed, highlight all the thumbs.db files, right click
and select 'Delete'.
Now reboot your PC and Windows will build a new set of thumbs.db files, one
for each folder that you selected 'Thumbnail view'.
See if this speed things up.
JS
K
Ken Blake, MVP
First, note the limit is on the number of *entries*, not files and
folders. It's entries, not files and folders, because files with long
file names use multiple entries. The effective number of files and
folders you can have is always less that the maximum number of
entries.
Second, the FAT16 limit on the number of entries in the root folder is
512.
For FAT32, the limit on the number of entries (in all folders, not
just the root folder) is 64K.
For NTFS, there is also a limitation, but it's so large (in the
millions or more) that it can effectively be disregarded.
K
Ken Blake, MVP
Right. (Well, actually 65,535, but I won't quibble about the extra one
That's the limit on the number of entries per *volume*, not folder.
The limit on folders is smaller, but I can't remember what it is. And
it's big enough that for all practical purposes, it can be ignored.
J
JS
I think it represents the number or combination of files and folders.
JS
JS
J
JD
What an interesting suggestion! I'll give it a try.
I do, however, have A LOT of pictures, in many sub-folders, in My Pictures.
Only one has been "slow." I wonder if this procedure might be "overkill." If
I could just delete the thumbs.db from that one folder and its sub-folders,
wouldn't that be more efficient?
Thank you for noting my earlier post. It is particularly the pictures files
that I was concerned about. Does a folder load more easily if it has, say,
100 .jpg files than, say, 500--or 1,000?
I do, however, have A LOT of pictures, in many sub-folders, in My Pictures.
Only one has been "slow." I wonder if this procedure might be "overkill." If
I could just delete the thumbs.db from that one folder and its sub-folders,
wouldn't that be more efficient?
Thank you for noting my earlier post. It is particularly the pictures files
that I was concerned about. Does a folder load more easily if it has, say,
100 .jpg files than, say, 500--or 1,000?
K
Ken Blake, MVP
What does? 4,294,967,295? That (2^32 - 1) is the maximum number of
*entries* (entries are always less than files and folders because a
file or folder with a long file name uses multiple entries) per
volume. The limit per folder is lower, but still big enough that none
of us has to worry about it yet.
J
JS
Well if your PC does not have a lot of memory it might take longer to load
and display the thumbnail pictures from the folder, especially if the folder
has a lot of picture files, thus a larger thumbs.db file to load and display
by Explorer. So yes you can be selective.
You might want to read this article below:
"Toggle Caching Thumbnails And Creating Thumbs.db Files :"
http://malektips.com/xpwex0041.html
JS
and display the thumbnail pictures from the folder, especially if the folder
has a lot of picture files, thus a larger thumbs.db file to load and display
by Explorer. So yes you can be selective.
You might want to read this article below:
"Toggle Caching Thumbnails And Creating Thumbs.db Files :"
http://malektips.com/xpwex0041.html
JS
J
John John (MVP)
You're mixing your VFAT and FAT32's with NTFS, Ken. NTFS only uses a
second directory entry when it generates MS-DOS short (8.3) file names,
and even then the short filename is stored in the same MFT entry
alongside the long filename (in the same file record). NTFS can store
filenames with up to 255 characters in a single MFT entry *plus* the
short filename entry, this doesn't reduce the maximum number of files
allowed on the volume.
John
John
K
Ken Blake, MVP
I've been doing some more research on this, and you seem to be right.
Thanks for the correction, and my apologies.