Search Support

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Learn More

'Search' not finding obvious result

  • 4 odgovori
  • 1 ima ovaj problem
  • 386 views
  • Posljednji odgovor poslao Andy_P

more options

Can someone please explain what's going on in this situation, and how to fix it if I'm doing something wrong?

I'm trying to use the simple "search" box on the main Thunderbird inbox screen, to find an email in my GMail inbox.

It is a booking confirmation for a hotel called the "Grant Arms". So I have put the word "grant" (or "Grant") in the search box.

I DO get some results, a few ancient emails with the word 'grant' or 'granted' in the body text, but I am NOT getting the email from a few days ago with the word "Grant" in both the header line and in the 'From' field and at least 7 times in the body.

I've noticed similar (and that time very distressing) behaviour before when the Search function has failed to find content that has been put in a sub-folder, but this time the "missing" email is in plain view on the front page of the inbox.

What's going on, please?

Can someone please explain what's going on in this situation, and how to fix it if I'm doing something wrong? I'm trying to use the simple "search" box on the main Thunderbird inbox screen, to find an email in my GMail inbox. It is a booking confirmation for a hotel called the "Grant Arms". So I have put the word "grant" (or "Grant") in the search box. I DO get some results, a few ancient emails with the word 'grant' or 'granted' in the body text, but I am NOT getting the email from a few days ago with the word "Grant" in both the header line and in the 'From' field and at least 7 times in the body. I've noticed similar (and that time very distressing) behaviour before when the Search function has failed to find content that has been put in a sub-folder, but this time the "missing" email is in plain view on the front page of the inbox. What's going on, please?

Izabrano rješenje

You can search on the body of IMAP folders in two ways: enter text in the Quick Filter Bar (Ctrl+Shift+K) and click the Body button, or Classic Search (Ctrl+Shift+F), select Body in the filter drop-down, enter the text. If the folders aren't set for offline use, i.e. only headers are downloaded, check 'Run search on server'.

Pročitajte ovaj odgovor sa objašnjenjem 👍 0

All Replies (4)

more options

Hi Andy Downloaded messages and content should be indexed for search. The index can get corrupted. Try searching with [ctrl][shift]F (search), and [ctrl][shift]K (filter on folder), and see if the results are different. Try this on a folder that is failing to find messages using the filter or global search: Right click on the name of the folder before the next search and select "Properties" from the context menu, then click on "Repair Folder". This should rebuild the index for that folder. Test and see if that works. If you have IMAP mail, Thunderbird may only download and search headers locally on your computer. Search for content of IMAP messages requests search results from the online email server rather than the local index. With POP mail, all content is indexed on the local computer. If you have problems with search on multiple folders, and the Repair Folder option helped for one folder, there is a method to rebuild all of the local search indexes. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/rebuilding-global-database Hope this helps, Agnes

more options

Thank you. Repairing the index has fixed the problem. Plus I now know for the future that TB cannot search the body of IMAP emails.

more options

Odabrano rješenje

You can search on the body of IMAP folders in two ways: enter text in the Quick Filter Bar (Ctrl+Shift+K) and click the Body button, or Classic Search (Ctrl+Shift+F), select Body in the filter drop-down, enter the text. If the folders aren't set for offline use, i.e. only headers are downloaded, check 'Run search on server'.

more options

Somehow I've picked the second post as the "chosen solution", that was unintentional and I want to thank BOTH posters for their helpful and useful replies.