Search Option only for searching within your own family pedigree
Not sure if this option exists already. If it does I can't find it. As I keep adding names to my pedigree, its time consuming to look up ancestors by scrolling through my family tree. I do have the option of going to recent people, but sometimes I haven't looked them up recently and I don't always have their ID number. Is it possible to have a search option solely for searching only within our own pedigree/family tree on FamilySearch?
Comments
-
@TB755 Thank you for your suggestion. It has been passed on to the proper Project Manager for review.
0 -
This is an oft-recurring suggestion. The problem boils down to scope: where does "your pedigree" end? Are you including all of your ancestors' descendants in your desired search area? What about spouses and in-laws? In a collaborative tree like this, determining and applying such limits to a search can very quickly become astronomically expensive in terms of processor and server load.
If the profiles you're interested in are all ones that you've contributed to, then you can go to Family Tree - My Contributions (https://www.familysearch.org/tree/contributions/changes). The list can be searched by name.
5 -
TB755 ✭
Much of this feature that you are looking for had been implemented many years ago in PAF 5.2. The feature was called: Advanced Focus Filter. PAF has been unsupported by Family Search for many years, but when it was supported, it was 50 years ahead of its time. The advanced features of PAF are likely to be found in Ancestral Quest. PAF and Ancestral Quest had some of the same developers. With the Advanced Focus Filter, a user could create a part of their PAF data base, as a focus. They could start with an individual, and get all their direct ancestors for a specified number of generations, and then they could come back down from those ancestors for a specified number of generations. That focus data base could then be searched with an amazing number of options. For instance, a user could find all persons in that focus data who died in a certain place in a specified time period. It is possible that the developers of Family Search found this feature to be too complicated to use for most of its users, but you could go to Ancestral Quest and likely get the full feature.
1 -
@Julia Szent-Györgyi I don't see how it could be anymore expensive on the processors than the current search that searches the entire database. Our pedigree's end when the mother and father for a person are not there, but we could also specify how many generations back we want to include, or FamilySearch could impose a limit, etc.
@s10297588641 Which apps would those be? Preferably free ones
0 -
This feature has been requested many times so it has got to be on FamilySearch's list of things to try and develop.
Regarding processor burden, the difference is that you either have to take the current search routine that searches then entire database then apply the "view my relationship" routine, which apparently does have a heavy processor burden, to every person in the list of results or you have to develop a new search routine by first defining how many generations up then down you want the search routine to look at (10 up - 10 down; 20 up - unlimited down, unlimited up - nothing down; unlimited up - unlimited down), and whether to include spousal lines going up and whether to follow spousal ancestors back down, then have the search routine start with the individual and trace each ancestral line up to the defined limit then down the defined limit. That kind of routine is probably pretty inefficient.
1 -
@Chandler 👹 At the bottom of the FamilySearch site pages, there is a link for the Solutions Gallery which has lots of options for additional family history options. If you are looking for something where you can build your own database from your own research, check out the Family Tree Management category. My favorite is RootsMagic. There is a free version available.
1 -
@ TB755
Would using the descendcy chart help at all with your particular needs?
0
