16 replies to this topic

[scottedwards2000]

When I use CCleaner to compact Chrome databases, and leave the history intact, I can still browse the history from Chrome, but searches return no results, regardless of search term.  Is this compact destructive in some way?
Thanks!
Scott Edwards
Pasadena, CA

[scottedwards2000]

Am I alone in this one?  No one else have a comment?  

scottedwards2000, on 08 May 2010 - 12:41 AM, said:

When I use CCleaner to compact Chrome databases, and leave the history intact, I can still browse the history from Chrome, but searches return no results, regardless of search term.  Is this compact destructive in some way?
Thanks!
Scott Edwards
Pasadena, CA

[Alan_B]

scottedwards2000, on 22 June 2010 - 05:43 PM, said:

Am I alone in this one?  No one else have a comment?  

Please advise.
Firstly ensure that you do obtain results from searches.
Then use CC but AVOID the compact option.
Then test if searches still give results, or if something happened with normal cleaning.
Then use the official compact facility which I assume is available/built-in to Chrome.
If that destroys your search it is a problem built into Chrome, and Compact should be avoided.

If however the Chrome compactor does no "damage",
but a re-run of CC compact again does "damage", then you have identified an anomaly that may be fixed.

Alan

[scottedwards2000]

Thanks, Alan, for replying!  Chrome has no built-in compact utility and I have confirmed that when I use CC and AVOID the compact option, I am able to search Chrome history (but results returned are only up to that last point where I DID use CC with the compact option on - so this seems to be some sort of destructive bug).

I wonder why no one else has reported this though - maybe Chrome is not as big as I think - it's a great browser - super fast!

[DennisD]

Hi Scott.

Are you using the latest version of CCleaner, V 2.33.1184? Just out today in fact.

There's improved handling of database compacting, which may make a difference to your issue:

Quote

CCleaner v2.33.1184
Added support for Flock 3.0.
Improved database compacting to only run when needed.
Improved Index.dat files cleaning for IE8 to include IECompatCache, IETldCache, PrivacIE folders.
Improved accuracy of cleaning status messages.
Improved localization and language support.
Improved UI text formatting for Cleaner screen.
Fixed Startup Tool double-clicking behavior on Win9x.
Minor improvements to Registry Cleaner on Windows 7.
Added Kurdish translation.

http://www.filehippo...wnload_ccleaner

Worth a try, and post back if you still have the problem.

[moon33]

scottedwards2000, on 22 June 2010 - 05:43 PM, said:

Am I alone in this one?  No one else have a comment?  

Hello Scott, you are not alone  
My CCleaner ver 2.33 does make me sulky for this issue  

[moon33]

DennisD, on 24 June 2010 - 05:57 PM, said:

Hi Scott.

Are you using the latest version of CCleaner, V 2.33.1184? Just out today in fact.

There's improved handling of database compacting, which may make a difference to your issue:



http://www.filehippo...wnload_ccleaner

Worth a try, and post back if you still have the problem.

Hi Dennis, I heard of CCleaner much late when my computer started to gulp cookies millions a day and just was going to fall sick   ..and I whizzed off to down the latest ver 2.33

CCleaner is sure a great tool and a GR8 freeware. But like Scott, I am a Chrome user- brilliant browser and things are really fast and its cool not to switch to any other browser in the world! But while I go back for my precious history, I gotto cry and hunt around all over the web for my lost links. So, I would really insist there is some kind of problem CCleaner team has to look through !

[DennisD]

I've no personal experience of Chrome unfortunately, as I've never used it, and as you correctly surmise, it's probably one for the devs unless any of the other guys on here (using Chrome) can give you something better in the meantime.

Sorry I couldn't be of more help.

[scottedwards2000]

This DOES seem to be fixed in newest version 2.33.1184, but I can't be sure b/c the new change is that it only compacts "when needed."  Maybe it just hasn't compacted yet, and it will still destroy history search when it does.  I will continue to monitor and post any updates.  Moon33 - what's your experience.

DennisD, when you said it is "ones for the devs" - don't they monitor these threads?  I wouldn't have posted here unless I thought they did.

[DennisD]

scottedwards2000, on 13 July 2010 - 02:22 PM, said:

DennisD, when you said it is "ones for the devs" - don't they monitor these threads?  I wouldn't have posted here unless I thought they did.

They read all the posts Scott. My comment meant that it's probably an issue needing a fix in a future version as opposed to one of the members using Chrome being able to give you a definitive answer.

The volunteer members here manage to find solutions for the vast majority of problems posted here, without input from the developers I might add, but there are issues which only they can address.

[scottedwards2000]

Looks like I spoke too soon - I guess the last couple runs of CC cleaner didn't compact Chrome history database (due to the new feature you mentioned of only compacting "when needed").  Now, after the latest cleaning, my chrome history is again unsearchable (no matter what search term I use, the results are always 0).

What's the best way to bring this horrendous (IMHO since I love Chrome and love the history search feature) BUG to the attention of the developers.  I saw your mention above that the devs read all the posts, but how can we highlight this in such a way so they know that it has been extensively TESTED and indeed IS a bug?

Thanks,
Scott

[MrT]

Sorry to hear that you are having problems with the Compact Databases and Google Chrome.

We haven't been able to reproduce the problem.

Can you please let us know which version of Google Chrome you are using?

Please, also provide more details about your system.

Thanks

[scottedwards2000]

Hi,

Sorry to take so long to reply - I was on vacation.  I am using the latest chrome (5.0.375.125) and the latest ccleaner (2.34.1200).  The problem is very simple - when ccleaner chooses to compact the chrome databases (which it doesn't do every time now, as of a couple versions ago - now it just does it when "needed"), it somehow screws up the chrome history search function so that, regardless of search term, no results are returned(e.g. type the following in the address bar to search for "test" in history:
chrome://history/#q=test&p=0

Interestingly, the history itself is preserved - if you type chrome://history/ in the address bar, you will see all the sites visited.  It's just that ccleaner is doing something that screws up the searching of the history.

I suspect it's something with reordering the indexes or something, but not sure.

my system is xp professional sp3

thanks for your help - I'd really like to be able to use the compact databases functionality in ccleaner, but for now have had to turn it off.

Perhaps the reason you haven't heard of this problem before is that very few people use chrome right now (but it's growing...).

Remember - in order to reproduce it, you can't just run ccleaner once - you have to make sure that ccleaner chooses to do the compacting of the chrome databases - so you might need to use chrome a bit to get to that point.

Thanks again!
Scott Edwards
Pasadena, CA

[pottster]

Hi,

I am experiencing exactly the same problem.

As I have not accumulated a history I cannot lose I experimented by deleting the history, accumulating a new history and using that for testing. The clear outcome from my tests is that using the Compact Database option for Chrome breaks the ability to search the history.

I'm using Ccleaner version 2.34.1200 and Chrome 5.0.375.125 beta

[pottster]

Sorry, a little more information. I'm using Win Xp Home SP3 (fully patched).

[pottster]

pottster, on 16 August 2010 - 04:34 AM, said:

Sorry, a little more information. I'm using Win Xp Home SP3 (fully patched).

[pottster]

The latest version of ccleaner (2.35.1219) appears to have resolved this problem. Thanks.