Milliseconds

[Kilmatead]

have you tried the windows explorer date column? The one without [S], perhaps it has better resolution

That would only work if Windows allowed the addition of '.fff' in the custom definitions of short and long time representations, which it doesn't (the short-time display is what controls that column's format). Nor, we might add, does x2 in szCustomTimeFormat (HKCU\Software\ZabaraKatranemia Plc\xplorer2_UC) - as you well know.

The millisecond times are not exactly the same as PowerShell sees for whatever reason... Can I lodge a feature request for millisecond support?

So even when PowerShell (or any other utility) show such numbers, there is nothing verifiably true about them in a practical sense, except regarding the Creation timestamp.

I wasn't lying when I answered your original query - FAT32/NTFS/ReFS simply do not support accurate millisecond timestamps, as implemented by Microsoft in Windows (the information is from their own developer documentation). This is the same reason it's "hidden" in XYplorer - your man provides it as a gimmick ("use at your own risk") - no 1st or 3rd-party file explorer can claim support for it as it is inherently unreliable (until MS say otherwise) - as all file explorers can only work with what they are given - and they are all given the same underlying structures.

As I said, the information is actually allocated within the SystemTime structure, but if MS itself says it's unreliable, why would anyone believe just because they can see it, it means that it's kosher? This is exactly why PowerShell and XYplorer show different values for the same objects.

Incidentally, the "Modified" timestamp is internally referred to as "Last Write" timestamp, with the proviso that the Timestamp is only updated when the filehandle is actually closed - not when the most recent data was actually written into its buffer (when an application closes the handle is purely up to the developer, and does not necessarily have to be immediately after the last write operation of that particular file, it could be whenever the developer arbitrarily decides he or she no longer needed the file open).



But, I suppose Nikos could provide it as a gimmick too, if he felt like it, and let people decide for themselves the layers of wool to pull over their own eyes. The "Freedom of Choice" illusion, and all that rot.

[nikos]

another loopy possibility: turn on RAW CONTENTS from VIEW menu, that will affect the stock date columns and get the dates exactly as they are on disk

[Kilmatead]

But if none of the time-column-display-formats allow for the designation of milliseconds, how can the information be displayed? Do you allow for something other than .fff in szCustomTimeFormat? MS don't allow such extended formats in custom strings.

[nikos]

you won't see the milliseconds but they should be used to sort the files exactly per millisecond

[Kilmatead]

you won't see the milliseconds but...

You're the kind of bloke who buys things labeled "Potpourri" for people when you don't know what else to get them, aren't you? Says a lot about a man, that does.

So, not only are milliseconds of dodgy reliability, but we are supposed to "trust" that the numbers are sorting even though we can't "see" them?

Again, I ask in vain, just exactly how did you lads manage to invent democracy?

[nikos]

all you need to do is try it. Sort by date in raw mode and see if the order agrees with that powershell script

[spacebar22]

all you need to do is try it. Sort by date in raw mode and see if the order agrees with that powershell script

You seem to have it correct, Nikos. If I turn on View > Raw Contents, I do not see milliseconds but the visible seconds changes slghtly to agree (when rounded) with the PowerShell values. And as far as I can see, the sort is then correct - the file of each pair that was created a few milliseconds earlier is displayed first.

As to the absolute accuracy of the milliscond times, I understand the creation date is reasonably reliable, and clearly it does distinguish files that are created only a few milliseconds apart, even if the absolute time is "unreliable".

So two questions for Nikos.

• What times are being used when Raw Contents is unchecked, and should you be showing the raw time instead?
• Is Raw Contents available in any of your free versions, if so which is the latest?

[nikos]

i think raw contents command is pro only