• Thatoneguy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    6 days ago

    Not an expert but I thought I would share my thoughts based on experience. When you look at the size of a file it’s stored in actual metadata of the file so it can be accessed quickly however since a folder is a collection of files it can’t easily keep that info. Once you ask the is what the size it is has to go and add up the values of each file contained in it. This can take a bit of time especially with larger folders so if windows constantly calculated the size of every folder it would just waste resources and make everything painfully slow. Again not an expert this is just how I think it happens.

    • TheFogan@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yeah, I’d say for the same reason that big enough folders can take several minutes to hours to actually give you their sizes.

    • gastroglizzy@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      You’re correct. An expert might have used some fancy words like “recursion” or “computational complexity”, but would have expressed essentially the same idea.

      OP, to solve your problem, use a program like TreeSize.

          • iocase@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            Neat! I’ll have to try that next time i need to work on a windows machine.

            Qdirstat is what i use on linux which is the OG afaik. Its actually what windirstat was porting over when it was initially made. Its insanely fast for me