| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
sixdoubleo
Old Timer
USA
739 Posts
Status: offline |
 Posted - 01/14/2005 : 12:45:22 PM
|
I run several scripts to back up directories to other servers....anyway, robocopy is randomly reporting files as older/newer for no rhyme or reason. When I look at my logs, I'll see that a whole bunch of files will be "same", and then all of the sudden a couple files will be "newer" or "older". These are files that haven't been touched in YEARS....
What is this all about? Anybody else seeing this? I am robocopying from a Windows 2003 Server to a Fedora Core 3 box running Samba (a backup server basically). Not sure if there's some filestamp issue going on. FWIW, XXCOPY works fine...which makes me wonder if there's some filestamp-checking option I can set in robocopy.
|
|
|
sixdoubleo
Old Timer
USA
739 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 11/15/2005 : 4:34:54 PM
|
By the way...going back through old posts...
Ends up this was solved with the /FFT switch. It forces ROBOCOPY to use FAT style time stamps which are 2-second granularity. This is needed when going between and NTFS and Linux/Unix/FAT or emulated file system.
|
 |
|
|
JSCLMEDAVE
Administrator
USA
4808 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 11/15/2005 : 4:41:03 PM
|
Is that the reason I am seeing the exact same thing with XML files? They were copied from an NT server, to a share on a 2003 Server.
http://web2.minasi.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16311
I have not had a chance to run more test on this as of yet, but I planned on it (hopefully) tommorow.
|
Tim-
"Will the woman who left her 9 kids at Wrigley field please come and claim them? - they're beating the Cubs 5-0"
|
|
|
|
sixdoubleo
Old Timer
USA
739 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 11/15/2005 : 4:55:45 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by JSCLMEDAVE
Is that the reason I am seeing the exact same thing with XML files? They were copied from an NT server, to a share on a 2003 Server.
http://web2.minasi.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16311
I have not had a chance to run more test on this as of yet, but I planned on it (hopefully) tommorow.
Could be. The problem I was having goes like this...
Say I have 10 files in a directory. File1, File2, File3, File4, etc.
Robocopy runs for the first time and copies all 10 files. Then let's say I run it again the next day and no files have changed in that day. What happens is that all of the sudden it thinks File3 is newer, File4 is older, File5 is older, and File9 is newer...when in fact no files have changed at all.
The granularity in the FAT vs. NTFS timestamps is causing the discrepancy. Turning FFT on fixes this.
|
|
|
|
JSCLMEDAVE
Administrator
USA
4808 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 11/15/2005 : 5:18:12 PM
|
| I will give that a try as soon as I can and will post back here. |
Tim-
"Will the woman who left her 9 kids at Wrigley field please come and claim them? - they're beating the Cubs 5-0"
|
|
|
|
David Fox
Welcome Newcomer
1 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 12/22/2005 : 9:08:03 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by sixdoubleo
Ends up this was solved with the /FFT switch.
Applying this switch eliminated most of my problems but not all. I still get a few files consistently showing up as "newer" when I robocopy to my Terastation. It's not too annoying but it is puzzling.
What surprises me is that more people aren't experiencing this problem. I've seen lots of articles recommending a robocopy/Terastation solution that don't say a word about this issue. Without /FFT, the number of bogus copies were making robocopy almost unusable. Either there's something odd with my installation, or all these authors have never actually tried it.
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Bug in Robocopy?
