Global search not available

[koppor]

Currently that the content of the search field is bound to a tab. In the old versions, it was globally stored. So I could click through the tabs and see if an entry is available somewhere.

Refs #1549, #104 (comment), #332, #1981

This is the thing, I miss most. I think, we described all our search features at https://help.jabref.org/en/Search for a description of our search capabilities. I can agree to go through the documentation and redesign it.

[tobiasdiez]

I think one can make an argument for both behaviors. @JabRef/developers opinions?

[LinusDietz]

I think it should be global. Also, there should be an indication in the tab whether there are results in the respective bibliographies.

[stefan-kolb]

One could implement it like that, but I guess this comes with a performance penalty, especially if we also check the other tabs without focus.

[LinusDietz]

Well, I think the performance overhead is not really too bad, since it is a linear increase with the number of bibliographies.

[stefan-kolb]

I guess the performance is already bad in a single database with a lot of entries. At least if I recall the reports correctly.

[teertinker]

For me, removing all sorts of global search in the current 5.0(beta1) is really a drawback. I always work with several tabs - and I think JabRef is intended to be used that way. When I search for an entry, I now have to enter the search term several times. Especially when using complex search terms, this becomes very time consuming. I really liked the additional global search window. Wouldn't it at least be possible to give an option to keep the search-term when switching tabs?

[acfrery]

The global search option is fundamental.

[ytzemih]

I am with @tobiasdiez that both options are useful. However, I in my context, I have used (and would desire to use) global search by far most often (afaik in JR3, both options were available, the search interface was actually quite fast and flexible). Moreover, tab-specific search has proven to be very inconvenient to me as I am usually working with 4-6 medium to large bib files, sometimes up to 10 depending on the projects I am involved. In at least 95% of the cases, I want to have the same search repeated/updated whenever I change the tab. One could say this is not how JR should be used in which case I am happy to receive some suggestions. On this note, it'd be nice to have a search history in the search field to assist in autocompletion. That might be an alternative to tab-specific search. So, like @teertinker and others, I am experiencing the search as it is now as a clear drawback, particularly, in combination with JR5 search's significantly lower time performance than the JR4 search. Thanks a lot.

[teertinker]

Can any development about the issue be expected in a foreseeable future? Is this about technical problems or design decisions? Honestly, I don't understand why global search has been removed. If working with tabs is a feature of jabref (which it really is - compared to other software like endnote), then workflows between tabs should be designed to be seamless. If a background search of all databases is too heavy, solutions in between are appreciated.

[stefan-kolb]

It is more or less a resource issue. The scarce resource is the unpaid developer that needs to implement this.

[koppor]

For the student project: Implement the search popup, where the ALL opened libraries are searched for papers. Start an old JabRef version (3.8.1 or so) using JRE8 to see the functionality.

[github-actions]

This issue has been inactive for half a year. Since JabRef is constantly evolving this issue may not be relevant any longer and it will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs.

As part of an effort to ensure that the JabRef team is focusing on important and valid issues, we would like to ask if you could update the issue if it still persists. This could be in the following form:

• If there has been a longer discussion, add a short summary of the most important points as a new comment (if not yet existing).
• Provide further steps or information on how to reproduce this issue.
• Upvote the initial post if you like to see it implemented soon. Votes are not the only metric that we use to determine the requests that are implemented, however, they do factor into our decision-making process.
• If all information is provided and still up-to-date, then just add a short comment that the issue is still relevant.

Thank you for your contribution!