I’d like to propose an improvement for password protected archives.
Actual behavior is:
If I open an archive, which is password protected and make a typo in the password dialog, I’ll get the message, that the password was wrong and I end up with an empty window. I need to reopen the archive to be able to enter the password again.
Tell me, that the password was wrong and give me the chance to enter the correct password to decrypt the archive.
I know I have been asking for this feature some time ago, but as nothing has changed let me ask again:
The ZIPX-format offers an algorithm, that compresses JPEG-files by about 20-30%. Please add compression (packing) support for this in ZIPX-archives to Powerarchiver. Extraction of JPEGs packed into ZIPX by this algorithm is already supported by Powerarchiver for a long time, so it should not be difficult? Or is it a licensing problem?
I’d like to suggest, that the correct archive type is (always) selected, when adding files by drag & drop to an archive.
This is already happening if the archive has the correct extension. For example, if I’m adding files to test.zip, zip will be selected. If I’m adding files to test.7z, 7z will be selected as format in “Add dialog”.
But this won’t be working, if the archive has not the “right” extension.
So XPI files (Firefox addons) for example are ZIP files. PowerArchiver opens them without any problems, but if I try to add file by drag & drop, PowerArchiver won’t auto select “ZIP”, but use the last selected archive format, while PowerArchiver already knows, that I’m trying to add files to a ZIP.
I love this, only there is one problem. The UAC elevation feature does not extend to Mount Image option in the add-on software PA provided. It is most annoying whenever I am on highest UAC settings and I mount an ISO, every time I open and create a virtual drive UAC appears. I also do not want to completely disable UAC.
Is adding UAC elevation for mount image feature possible?
I noticed that when I want to run the Virtual Drive for the first time inside the PowerArchiver Burner it prompts to download it form the internet.
I was wondering, would it be OK to include this utility straight into the offline installer to be able to set it up locally?
How about recognising a few more (or all) of the file formats that are basically renamed zip files and treating them is if they are zip files.
For instance Android .apk files are just renamed .zip files.
Libreoffice/Openoffice ODF documents are all, as far as I am aware, just renamed .zip files. (.odt, .ott, .ods, .ots, .odp, .otp, .odb, .odf etc.)
Would it be possible at all in some future version perhaps, to have a “find file” function?
Reason I ask is that I was looking for a certain file I knew existed in an archive, but I had to unzip it then use another tool to find the file. It would have saved that extra step if that function existed in PA itself.
Is there a way to enable the user to encrypt the files inside a ZIPX archive that has already been created?
This could save time for large archives that the user may need to encrypt at a later stage or that he/she has forgotten to enable encryption before creating the archive,
I would like to see a new feature implemented: a ‘Fast Extract’ Mode.
Currently PowerArchiver extracts files to a temporary directory and then moves them to the target directory chosen by the user. At least via drag and drop.
This can be both time consuming and needs free space on the system drive for large files.
Is there a way to directly extract files to the target directory with PowerArchiver?
And if not, can a feature like this be considered for future updates?
Thanks very much!
I believe it would be useful to implement Serpent-256 encryption for PAE/PAE2 formats, even though PowerArchiver offers strong encryption ciphers already.
(deleted part advertising other software - admin)
Do you think this will be a useful addition?
Thank you for the consideration!
I think it would be a great option to make the portable version of PowerArchiver compatible with PortableApps (i.e. adding the necessary files and folders to integrate it smoothly into their structure).
I own various other commercial programmes which -when installed in portable mode- offer to make the becessary changes without needing an extra installer or the official PortableApps repos.
Thanks for opinions or perhaps even a realization of this.
UNSOLVED Multicore support for testing a large amount of archives at once
AluminumHaste last edited by
I was just testing 43 zip files to see if any of them had an issue. I selected all of them in Windows Explorer, right clicked one of them and picked Powerarchiver->Test.
I noticed right away that PA was doing 1 archive at a time and my CPU’s and HDD were basically doing nothing.
I have 4 cores and 8 threads (i7 4770k) and running this off a fast Intel SSD. Why not let PA do as many files at once as cores/threads?
Do 4 files at once or 8, what about people with Rizen or Threadripper? You could do 16 files at once or 32.
Is this possible?
@aluminumhaste it is certainly possible to figure out few different ways it could be multithreaded. I have too check the speed when several are run at once and see what would be the speedup like.
Also there is a complication that while simultaneously testing several archives that are on an SSD would probably go faster if they were on a traditional rotating disk hard drive it could easily end up going much much slower than if they were tested one after another.
Plus testing certain kinds of archive already uses multiple threads just to test one archive.
AluminumHaste last edited by AluminumHaste
@spwolf I took your suggestion of testing multiple instances at once.
So here’s my set up.
I have 200 zip files in one folder on a old, slow hard disk on my work computer.
I tested all 200 at once and got:
Time To complete: 1min 49sec
Disk Usage: ~12 MB/s
Queue Queue Length: Less than 1
CPU Usage: 25% CPU (So was using 1 core/thread)
Memory Usage: ~70MB
I then copied 50 zip files at a time into 4 sub directories and had their directories open in Explorer.
I then selected all the files in each window, then right clicked on one archive in window 1->Powerarchiver->Test.
then right clicked on one archive in window 2->Powerarchiver->Test.
then right clicked on one archive in window 3->Powerarchiver->Test.
then right clicked on one archive in window 4->Powerarchiver->Test.
Since I had to do this manually I would estimate that took between 5-8 seconds to get all 4 tests going.
The test results were:
Time To Complete: 1min 10sec (minus 5-8 seconds for the time it took to get 4 instances running)
Disk Usage: ~40MB/sec Disk Usage
Disk Queue Length: Less than or equal to 3
CPU Usage: ~90%
Memory Usage: ~240MB
So minus the time I wasted clicking on windows to get the other tests going, it shaved about 50 seconds off the test time.
Intel Core i3 2120 2 cores 4 threads (Sandy Bridge)
Seagate ST250DM000-1BD141 (https://www.seagate.com/files/staticfiles/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/barracuda-ds1737-1-1111us.pdf)
Cheap and slow HDD.
@aluminumhaste thank you for doing beautiful work with testing.
I have already tested it at the time that you wrote OP, or maybe 2-3 days later… in any case, yes it is faster.
There are two ways to implement this - test several archives at once, or test multiple files inside archives at once… i will see with @ivan whats possible, we were busy with pressing things about PA 2018.
AluminumHaste last edited by
Okay no problem, thank you for looking into it. With the proliferation of multi core CPUs, anything that uses more cores will be a boon.