Jump to content
  • 0

(Archived) BUG: Search still broken after months of promises to fix


cjdeheer

Idea

Incredibly, the search bug reported here and here and here is still not fixed in v3.1.2.

To recap, the problem is that when I perform a search for, say, tag:todo, there are 12 matching notes, but Evernote Mac only shows me 10 of them. There's a "12" next to the todo tag. Evernote Web correctly shows 12 notes. If I rename the tag to something else, say, todo1 and then select it, it now finds 12 notes. Then I have to change the name back to todo.

The problem is a user wouldn't know this problem is happening when doing a compound search, for, say, tag:tax tag:2011. So when doing your taxes, you might only find a subset of the relevant notes.

The Evernote employee who has been participating in these threads just keeps posting that they've been busy with other stuff but they plan to make search work sometime in the future. That's totally mind-boggling to me. Searching is *the* foundational feature of Evernote.

Removing the local Evernote db and re-downloading it solves the problem, but as new notes are added, the problem recurs.

Link to post

16 replies to this idea

Recommended Posts

Thanks for letting us know. We're aware of several search-related issues and working to fix them.

I wasn't able to replicate this specific issue, but I'll keep my eye on it. Let me know if you find a concrete example that is replicable (especially after you delete your local DB).

I reported it a number of times to support a long time ago and they acknowledged the bug after reviewing my logs. To be honest, I got tired of resubmitting it and sending logs after each update when it didn't appear that the engineers had even attempted to fix it yet. If someone wants to tell me the engineers believe they have fixed the bug I've already submitted many times, then I'll go to the trouble of redownloading the db. But I'm done spending time on troubleshooting something that I have no reason to believe has been addressed.

Link to post

I did a clean re-initial sync of my database yesterday, and the problem is already happening again. Here are some searches I just did, and the results on the Mac and web clients:

—"philosophy": Mac 395, web 397.

—"earth": Mac 975, web 976.

—"evernote": Mac 382, web 389.

—"finally": Mac 1687, web 1690.

—"search": Mac 1963, web 1972

Jack, is there anything more I can do to try to help you guys fix this?

Link to post

Devs really need to be able to have access to data that will always create the problem in the existing code. That's what I suspect he means by repeatable. Once you can always create the problem with the existing code, after making changes, you can use the same data & see if the problem has been fixed. If devs can't recreate the situation, then it's very difficult to try to make sure you've fixed it.

Yes, I can appreciate that it must be difficult for them to troubleshoot without access to my local db. But that's the nature of Evernote, so I don't consider it an excuse to continue ignoring the problem, which is what has been happening for well over a year. I've reported the bug several times (including again yesterday, ticket 16051-115399) and provided my log files. Not once has anyone followed up asking me for updated log files, or to say "I think we've addressed the problem, can you download a fresh db and test. If it happens again, please send us new log files." Nothing like that. What I *have* heard from Evernote employees several times is "We're aware of some search issues, but we've been devoting our resources to upcoming new features. We hope to make search a priority in the future." So you can see why I sound so irritated.

Link to post

Thanks for letting us know. We're aware of several search-related issues and working to fix them.

I wasn't able to replicate this specific issue, but I'll keep my eye on it. Let me know if you find a concrete example that is replicable (especially after you delete your local DB).

Thanks for letting us know. We're aware of several search-related issues and working to fix them.

I wasn't able to replicate this specific issue, but I'll keep my eye on it. Let me know if you find a concrete example that is replicable (especially after you delete your local DB).

I reported it a number of times to support a long time ago and they acknowledged the bug after reviewing my logs. To be honest, I got tired of resubmitting it and sending logs after each update when it didn't appear that the engineers had even attempted to fix it yet. If someone wants to tell me the engineers believe they have fixed the bug I've already submitted many times, then I'll go to the trouble of redownloading the db. But I'm done spending time on troubleshooting something that I have no reason to believe has been addressed.

Same situation as cjedeheer. I "only" reported this twice, but I don't know whether it's worth my time or Evernote staff's time to keep reporting this. Jackolicious, you think more reports would help Evernote fix the bug?

Also, wiping the local database clean and doing a new initial sync "solves" the problem—for a little while. The issue is this:

Removing the local Evernote db and re-downloading it solves the problem, but as new notes are added, the problem recurs.

Over time, repeatedly, our local Mac databases are becoming corrupted or un-indexed or something. That's the problem.

Link to post
  • Level 5

I really appreciate all this feedback everyone. I can confidently say that your complaints are not falling on def ears and moreover, we are also avid Evernote users, so we have the same problems!

We're working hard to improve all aspects of the Evernote experience, so keep your eyes peeled. Also, keep posting about issues you're having. Every piece of input helps!

Link to post

I'm experiencing a similar problem with the android client. It seems this problem may not be limited to just one platform. I agree with others who've said that search is fundamental. If it's not working perfectly then this app is almost useless. I don't want to have to migrate back to microsoft one note now that they've released clients for mobile phones.

Link to post

It's definitely helpful to have more information than not enough. As always, the most helpful thing is creating concrete repeatable cases that cause issues.

Everyone's db is different, so I'm not sure what you mean by repeatable. Repeatable by others, or repeatable in my system? I just submitted the bug again with a screenshot of the search results for -tag:* and several of the notes in the results do have tags. That's a concrete example and it's repeatable on my end. I get the same wrong results every time. Evernote Web shows the correct results.

Link to post

It's definitely helpful to have more information than not enough. As always, the most helpful thing is creating concrete repeatable cases that cause issues.

Everyone's db is different, so I'm not sure what you mean by repeatable. Repeatable by others, or repeatable in my system? I just submitted the bug again with a screenshot of the search results for -tag:* and several of the notes in the results do have tags. That's a concrete example and it's repeatable on my end. I get the same wrong results every time. Evernote Web shows the correct results.

Devs really need to be able to have access to data that will always create the problem in the existing code. That's what I suspect he means by repeatable. Once you can always create the problem with the existing code, after making changes, you can use the same data & see if the problem has been fixed. If devs can't recreate the situation, then it's very difficult to try to make sure you've fixed it.

Link to post
  • Level 5*

I agree that having a rock-solid, reliable, consistent Search is one of the most important features that Evernote is built on.

CEO Phil Libin, and other Evernote employees, often state that Evernote is here to help you remember *everything*. Remembering everything has two essential parts that must work flawlessly:

  1. It must always accurately record every memory
  2. It must always accurately find and recall the memory you need -- this means accurate Search.

IMO, fixing bugs associated with either of these two key features must always take top priority, especially priority over new features.

Link to post
  • Level 5

Thanks for letting us know. We're aware of several search-related issues and working to fix them.

I wasn't able to replicate this specific issue, but I'll keep my eye on it. Let me know if you find a concrete example that is replicable (especially after you delete your local DB).

Link to post

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...