500,000 limit

[00]

I've reached the duplicate files limit - 500,000 files.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m6OWye ... sp=sharing
I have Duplicate Cleaner Pro v3.2.6. Is this still the limit in the current version of the software? Also, until now, I've been very satisfied with DC and saw no reason to upgrade, fearing that the new version built with .Net would be slower. (It took forever to reach the limit.) Can anybody please confirm or allay my fears?

Thank you!

[DigitalVolcano]

You can change that limit in v3.2.7 to 2 million in the settings.
See-
https://www.duplicatecleaner.com/manual ... =&sct=MjE=

Every Duplicate Cleaner since version 2.0 is built using the .NET Framework, so you shouldn't notice the difference upgrading to 4.1 . If anything, it should be faster as there were a lot of improvements, particularly for large scans with many similar size files. The file limit was removed.

If you do stick with version 3, i'd suggest installing 3.2.7 over 3.2.6 as there are a few performance improvements.

[00]

Thank you!

I hope you don't mind my asking a potentially disquieting question, but did moving to .Net improve speed performance or hamper it? Are there significant advantages to moving to version 4?

Thanks again!

[therube]

did moving to .Net improve speed performance or hamper it?

Don't know if that's the right question to ask (the .Net part).
Further, we need to define "speed".

In program opening, IMO (from what I remember) DC3 is faster, lighter feeling, then DC4.

In scanning speed, oh, not sure offhand.
I'd suspect, hope that DC4 is faster, & more feature filled (it's been a while since I've opened DC3).


Within limits, I like program that are "light", that open quickly.
Now features, or lack thereof, can color that equation.

Take Firefox.
The only "feature" that Firefox (Quantum) can tout is "speed".
Speed in opening. Speed in rendering pages.

I look at it like, big deal.
To me, they (Mozilla, Firefox Quantum) took away great amounts of functionality - they did, replacing it with cruft.

So I persist with my "older", "slower" browser that is actually functional (SeaMonkey).
(Yes, I dabble in other browsers, including at the moment, but my "go to, do everything" browser is not a browser whose only feature is "speed".)

I take, in most cases, functionality over "speed".
And that said, sometimes I'll give up functionality to gain "speed" - depending on particular circumstances.

IOW, you use the tool that fits the requirement.

[DigitalVolcano]

Both 3 and 4 use .NET