Ability to support file synchronization for both local and network locations.Ability to generate preview of the ongoing operations during the sync process. ![]() No file limits or use limits specified for the syncing operation.Ability to filter files or folders by including/excluding them based on the guidelines specified by you.Compatibility with portable devices, hard drives (internal and external) and a whole lot of other devices.Should be able to identify file variances in cases where the file altered in both the locations during the last sync process.Availability of dual modes of operation that is, manual and automatic.Ability to encourage removals and identify renames with a log file of earlier actions.Ability to sync files both one-way and two-way.Ability to simulate any source folder even while the files engaged.So, let’s take a look at the must-haves for a good file and folder synchronization tool. If your main aim is to sync your data between devices in a local network, using a good file syncing tools would be a wise choice rather than a cloud syncing option. Must-haves for a good file and folder synchronization tool So, till you have the opportunity use your files and data directly from the loud, a compelling file and folder synchronization tool is your best option. Not just that, these tools can also help you create the same files, modify them or even remove the files from other location at the same time. Moreover, whenever you create data files, modify them or even remove them from one location the file syncing tools help you keep track of these actions. For example, you can easily keep updated variants of the identical data on your home as well as an office computer. Maybe my recognitions will help other users with the same problems.You can even choose to save the two identical files on separate disks, online storage or even on two different USB drives. By the way, the detection of shifted files is the main reason why I use FFS. Because FFS recognizes shifted files the syncing is very fast. Then I transfer the files of the source device into their destination folders. Then I copy the complete folder manually to the backup device. I decided to put all new files into a first level folder of my working device. The difference of transfer speed is an inbuild problem which cannot be solved technically but strategycally. Windows Explorer was twice as fast than FFS or AllSync. I tested transferring a big amount of picture files from one USB device to another. A point I have recognized when managing downloaded picture files with endless names. It might be the same when using sync tools.Īdditionally Windows Explorer has a better management when using long filenames. So it might be when using TeraCopy instead of explorer. That may mean Windows Explorer has a higher priority for I/O tasks than the sync tools when energy is rare.Īnother user of FFS told me that Windows Explorer may have a better management with high leveled folder structure. Using devices with their own energy supply decreases the difference in speed. ![]() The problem occurs more intense when using USB decices without energy supply. Two other sync tools (AllSync, GoodSync) have the same problem. There is nothing installed than Win10.īut I have some new information that helped me understanding the issue. I have a second notebook with a clean system espacially for testing and checking new programs and probably dangerous things. I had no crash or hang so Process Explorer didn't help me. I hope some else had the same problem and found a xCSxXenon: Thank you for the information. Since months I help myselfe by copying big amounts of new files manually. That speeds up copying only for 1 or 2 minutes. Increasing the threads (possible with donation edition) doesn't help. In this cases the difference in speed is higher. The thing becomes worser when file names are very long or include unnormal signs like russian or chinese letters. I used several backup devices, different cables, different USB ports. I tested it several times with video files larger than 100 MB. I use FFS for syncing/backing up the data of my notebooks to several USB devices by USB 3. That means about 50 - 60 MB/s vs 15 - 20 MB/s. ![]() The Explorer copies new data about 3 times faster than FFS. In every cases of deep folder structure, FFS copies much slower than Explorer or TeraCopy do.ĭeep folder structure means more than 3 or 4 folder levels. I posted this problem in February but my posting seems to be deleted.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |