Add "SHOULD contain" to restrictions

Feature Requests
#1

What I really want is indexer prioritization:

But I see this has been talked about for years and never implemented. Couch Potato had a good weighting system and yes, it could be a bit complex but it was entirely optional. So any argument that this makes things more confusing seems invalid.

I can’t weigh in on that issue as it has been locked, so I wanted to propose a possible workaround in the form of a “should contain” category under the Indexer restrictions.

This category would effectively weight the order of choices. So if I added to this “DTS” to this it would automatically put DTS to the top of the list. If I did this now with “must contain” I won’t get anything if there isn’t a DTS release. Additionally, if Sonarr can simply expose the indexer name (perhaps by assigning it a unique tag displayed on its properties), then the user can add this name/tag to the “should contain.” This effectively allows the user to place one indexer above the other. Finally, the order of the tags could be priority to apply so three indexers applied in order would give priority as such.

Yes - this is a type of weighting, but it is very straight forward and should not be a substantial overhaul to the existing sorting of the hits.

thanks.

#2

Should contain in a release name is not indexer prioritization, indexer prioritization is preferring an otherwise equal release from one indexer over another. That issue is locked because no valuable information was added, it was just noise.

What you’re actually looking for has another issue:

Yes, also years old, but when there are hundreds of open issues and only so little time to actually work on things, that’ll happen.

#3

Thanks.
Yes - it technically isn’t indexer prioritization…I was writing that off as probably not happening based on that issue #. #385 is what I am talking about for the most part…but I believe you can probably kill two birds with one stone by exposing the indexer as one of the preferred words. It wouldn’t be the same type of prioritization, but based on what I’m reading on the indexer issue it seems the devs would prefer not to create too complex a weighting mechanism.

Just looking at a manual search (as I have read that is the order Sonarr would pick), it would be fairly trivial to take that list and move entries with preferred words to the top of their respective qualities. It would take someone with more skill than myself, but objectively I think it a quicker route to 90% of the functionality people need.

Ofc, I understand there are limited resources :slight_smile:

#4

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.