How to see more results with the same filters?

rich 2014-10-31 19:31:05 UTC #1

At the top of the table if it says "714 results found", can I see all 714 results somehow?
I get about 60 rows in the results table, but no paging buttons or continuous scrolling that I could figure out.

ChrisGammell 2014-10-31 19:49:42 UTC #2

Ah, you're the first to notice that. The 50 rows you see will have upwards of 500 records attached (assuming each base number has 10 showable results). But if there are actually more than 500 you want to browse, the lack of pagination will limit you right now.

Would you mind sharing your search URL? I'm curious the situation when you are looking at 714 results (but can understand when that happens, I've had searches in the past that I just want to browse through all of the available results)

rich 2014-10-31 20:18:09 UTC #3

714 was just an example to show the problem, the url is below if it is use.
I have had more realistic cases where I knew something strange was happening, but couldn't figure out what. In hindsight it would have been this row limit I was bumping into.

714 results:
https://parts.io/search/Class-Analog%20Integrated%20Circuits/Category-Switching%20Regulator%20or%20Controller?sort=Base%20Number%20asc&Package%20Code=soic&Part%20Life%20Cycle%20Code=active&expand=true

ChrisGammell 2014-10-31 20:39:45 UTC #4

Cool, we'll definitely feed this back to our developers and get working on the pagintation.

One thing that I noticed is a lot of those results don't have price or stock. This won't matter for everyone (say you're seeking out an obsolete chip or something), but that is a great way to narrow the field of data available. Clicking the "Has Stock = true" took it down to 59 results. Not saying this fixes the problem at hand, just offering it as a workaround for now.

rich 2014-10-31 20:42:05 UTC #5

Is the same row limit also happening when you click "show all" from the Base Number filter panel too? There don't seem enough in the popup dialog to represent the results.

ChrisGammell 2014-10-31 20:44:36 UTC #6

Yes, I believe if the base number has more than 50 results it will not show them all because of pagination. This is a much more immediate effect.

rich 2014-10-31 20:53:01 UTC #7

Ah ok.
Interestingly in my use of parts.io so far I have generally avoided filtering on "has stock". Partly because I wasn't sure how valid that data would be in an alpha, partly because I'm guessing it's US stock numbers, and partly because it's design phase for me, not purchasing phase.

ChrisGammell 2014-10-31 21:13:05 UTC #8

The reason that is a good filter is that is it shows it exists in some distribution somewhere. This at least means you'll be able to get samples for prototyping (when you get there) and it serves as a signal of eventual availability.

rich 2014-10-31 21:41:56 UTC #9

In theory, that makes sense. In practice though, how reliable/current would you say the data is today on the alpha, vs in a future v1.0 ? And if it is available at Mouser/Digikey/Element-14 variants should that show as stock in parts.io?

Here is a practical example, which, admittedly, may have other issues looking at it's lack of electrical data. However, it's today's puzzle:
Search for BD9329, one result returned, no price, no stock. Now manually search digikey, mouser and el14. It seems pretty available from those sources,

Also on this topic, how complete is the database of parts? For example the chip I was really trying to find was BD93291 which has mixed availability, but I couldn't find through a text search in parts.io

ChrisGammell 2014-11-03 02:20:48 UTC #10

The BD9329 is a weird example right now because it just got switched over to the regulator category. If you manually force it to go in that category, it comes up with some different results: http://parts.io/search/term-BD9329/Class-Regulator%20Circuits/Category-Switching%20Regulator%20IC

So how does this relate to the "seeing more results" with the same filters? You would resort to looking through results manually?

rich 2014-11-03 11:24:42 UTC #11

I may be missing the subtlety of your question, but the answer is a straightforward "yes" in my mind. Fully specified searches can return over 50 rows which I would search manually. If I then bend the search criteria to work around holes in data, those results may also be over 50 rows. Scanning a table by eye looking for patterns doesn't take very long at all (especially if the sort order is favourable) and is often quicker than adjusting filters and refreshing multiple times.

The BD9329 was just an example, I'm sure there are others, From your link, it now has stock data but is still missing electrical parameters, so I assume that a search for Vin > nn would still miss it.

At a high level, how confident the user is in the underlying data and search results influences quantity and breadth of filter combinations they are likely to use. I'm sure you guys are working hard to provide the best data that you can, but it is probably inevitable that at any instance in time, some parts will be incomplete or inaccurate.

ChrisGammell 2014-11-03 16:11:11 UTC #12

Oh I just didn't quite understand how the BD9329 fit in the thread of this conversation, but I think I get it now. You make a great point about the visually scanning, that's exactly how I used to do it with Digikey as well. Mostly by necessity because there was just so much data presented. I think part of the problem to solve is figuring out just how much filtering we expect our users to do and I think your example shows that regardless of how much they do, we need to show more than 50 results.