copy limitations in NTFS?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gerry Cornell
  • Start date Start date
G

Gerry Cornell

Well your clock is wrong for a start.

What programme are you using to copy?

How much free space on each hard disk?

To increase you free space on your C select Start, All Programs,
Accessories, System Tools, Disk CleanUp, More Options, System Restore and
remove all but the latest System Restore points? Restore points can be quite
large.

You should use Disk CleanUp regularly to Empty your Recycle Bin and
Remove Temporary Internet Files. Whenever you remove redundant files you
should always run Disk Defragmenter by selecting Start, All Programs,
Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter.

Do you have a Norton Protected Recycle Bin?


--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:49:54 -0600
From: "NewbieSupreme" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: copy limitations in NTFS?
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:50:46 -0800
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Lines: 101
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.43.126.137

--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
I get an error that the system is out of resources when copying a large
number of lrage files. In searching the newsgroups, it appears limitations
only exist in windows 2000. My configuration is as follows:

- AMD 64FX CPU
- 1Gb RAM
- 2 250 Gb Western Digital SATA drives cables to SATA ports on mobo
- 1 100Gb Western Digital IDE drive ribboned to blue IDE port on mobo
- Windows XP Pro, all current service packs/fixes installed (OS is on 1st
SATA drive)

I'm attempting to copy 48 Gb (356,000 files in 20,000 folders) from one SATA
drive to another, and also tried from one SATA to the IDE. After about an
hour of copying, I get an error that the system ran out of resources. This
seems to be a pretty kickass configuration to have this problem; does anyone
know what might be causing this? I tried once while running a couple
instances of ie in the background, and once with nothing running in
background. I've run a complete updated Norton virus scan on everything,
and have checked the processes running during copy, and nothing was taking
up huge amounts of RAM or CPU capacity.

I did some checking on caching and how to set page filing, etc., and the
numbers that exist in the current settings seem good enough to do anything,
although only one SATA is set to use page swapping (the one w/ the OS on
it). Is that the problem? Or do I need to set something to have as much
RAM or caching or pagefiling as amount of files being copied?

Thanks for reading, any help, advice, tips, etc. would be greatly
appreciated.
 
I assume that was to show the time on the header, and I saw that this
(non-problem) PC was set to Pacific, not Eastern. However, I have checked
the problem PC (I'm not posting from that one), and the zone and time are
correct.

Again, these posts are sent from a PC which I do NOT have any of these
problems on.

Thanks again
 
Won't copying from a USB drive be slower? Is it the quicker USB 2.0
or the older slower version? Are the files fragmented?

Try running Disk CleanUp in all user profiles!

You should use Disk CleanUp regularly to Empty your Recycle Bin and
Remove Temporary Internet Files. Whenever you remove redundant files you
should always run Disk Defragmenter by selecting Start, All Programs,
Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter.

I would suggest you try cCleaner.
http://www.ccleaner.com/ccdownload.asp
http://www.ccleaner.com/

With any cleaner you need to proceed with caution. I invariably
recommend creating a restore point before using cCleaner.
cCleaner also offers backup before removal.

When using cCleaner think twice before checking before
Autocomplete Form History under Internet Explorer.
You do get a warning but this one has irritating consequences.

--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
NewbieSupreme said:
The clock is not wrong, I checked this after someone else said this
was the problem from another post (repeated and incessant "delayed
write" and "$mfg" errors. I set the clock right according to local
time, and I UNchecked using Internet time in the clock's properties,
because it kept screwing my time up, even though I had the right
zone. If it's 2 or 3 seconds off the U.S. officicial atomic clock,
is that a problem? BTW, the post is being sent from a different PC
than the problem one, but the clock's right on this one too.
Click to expand...


No it's not right. Your post is time-stamped 7:50pm, translated to my local
(MST) time zone. I'm replying to you at 6:06, over an an hour and a half
before tthe time-stamp on your post.

Either the time is set wrong or (more likely) the time zone is set wrong.
 
Manny

The data I'm
--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Manny

Your another who has no sense of time!

From: "Manny Borges" <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: copy limitations in NTFS?
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:23:55 -0500
Lines: 214
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24-181-231-251.dhcp.oxfr.ma.charter.com 24.181.231.251
Path: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl
Xref: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics:262683


--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Gerry:

Thanks very much for the post.

The clock is not wrong, I checked this after someone else said this was the
problem from another post (repeated and incessant "delayed write" and "$mfg"
errors. I set the clock right according to local time, and I UNchecked
using Internet time in the clock's properties, because it kept screwing my
time up, even though I had the right zone. If it's 2 or 3 seconds off the
U.S. officicial atomic clock, is that a problem? BTW, the post is being
sent from a different PC than the problem one, but the clock's right on this
one too.

There is PLENTY of space all over the place; this is all coming off a
complete wipe and fresh install, to recover from those delayed write errors
and data being lost on one of the SATA drives. The data I'm using has been
copied from external USB drives, which I fille dup in a panic when my data
was being lost during the $mft errors, etc.

The method for copying from one drive to another is just to use Windows XP's
drag-drop in Windows Explorer. To copy on one drive, I just use the
cntrl+c/cntrl+v shortcut keys while in Windows Explorer.

There is no Norton protection on recycle bin.

Any other sugestions from anyone?

Thanks again.
 
NewbieSupreme said:
I get an error that the system is out of resources when copying a large
number of lrage files. In searching the newsgroups, it appears limitations
only exist in windows 2000. My configuration is as follows:

- AMD 64FX CPU
- 1Gb RAM
- 2 250 Gb Western Digital SATA drives cables to SATA ports on mobo
- 1 100Gb Western Digital IDE drive ribboned to blue IDE port on mobo
- Windows XP Pro, all current service packs/fixes installed (OS is on 1st
SATA drive)

I'm attempting to copy 48 Gb (356,000 files in 20,000 folders) from one
SATA drive to another, and also tried from one SATA to the IDE. After
about an hour of copying, I get an error that the system ran out of
resources. This seems to be a pretty kickass configuration to have this
problem; does anyone know what might be causing this? I tried once while
running a couple instances of ie in the background, and once with nothing
running in background. I've run a complete updated Norton virus scan on
everything, and have checked the processes running during copy, and
nothing was taking up huge amounts of RAM or CPU capacity.

I did some checking on caching and how to set page filing, etc., and the
numbers that exist in the current settings seem good enough to do
anything, although only one SATA is set to use page swapping (the one w/
the OS on it). Is that the problem? Or do I need to set something to
have as much RAM or caching or pagefiling as amount of files being copied?

Thanks for reading, any help, advice, tips, etc. would be greatly
appreciated.
Click to expand...


So are you ever going to tell *us* just what you do to do the copying? Are
you just pointing to a folder and trying to copy it and everything
underneath to another folder or drive? IE seems to get a list of all the
files it wants to copy by folder and I've seen where something like 32,000
files will make it puke. Plus if one file fails to copy then the whole copy
operation gets aborted and you really don't know how much you've copied
already and you cannot resume the aborted copy from wherever it stopped.

Have you tried using the 'xcopy' command at a DOS prompt? It allows
continuing the copy in case of an error and it may read a list of filenames
differently than the internal 'copy' function. If that fails then I'd be
looking at using robocopy (part of Win2K resource kit) or maybe even XXcopy
(don't remember if it is free- or shareware).

Also, make sure you disable your anti-virus program. Since you are creating
new files, the AV program is going to interrogate them for viruses and that
will hugely impact the speed of doing the copying. Too many AV programs
cannot handle huge-sized files, either. Rather than scan across a subrange
of clusters assigned to the file, they try to read the entire file and then
scan for the viral signature.
 
The copying I'm having problems with is not from USB to HD, it's from HD to
HD. The USB's are external drives I bought to frantically get as much data
as I could backed up before the files were inaccessible due to the $mfg and
"data has been lost" errors. I've since wiped/formatted all internal
drives, and am copying things back and forth to see if I keep running into
problems. And, as I am posting, I am.
 
I will be sure to disable Norton and try again. I apologize for not
mentioning the method of copying, I assumed in a WindowsXP basics group that
most people use Windows Explorer. I'm not drag/dropping any IE or Windows
folders, just many organized large Photoshop files from scans and offline
Web folders.

When you say "IE" do you mean Windows Explorer? If I'm copying more than
100,000 files or so, should I always avoid Windows Explorer to drag/drop or
cntrl-c and cntrl-v? I was unaware that there were problem areas and/or
limitations, which is really what this post was asking to begin with.


Thanks for the advice.
 
NewbieSupreme said:
I will be sure to disable Norton and try again. I apologize for not
mentioning the method of copying, I assumed in a WindowsXP basics group
that most people use Windows Explorer.
Click to expand...

But most does not preclude some from submitting commands from a DOS prompt.
Also, there are lots of utilities available that will do copying. GUIs are
nice for ease of use but often lack the control per operation that you can
achieve with command-line parameters that you can specify with DOS-level
commands. As you continue using Windows, you will need to use the DOS
prompt for commands for which an equivalent GUI function would be difficult
to provide.
I'm not drag/dropping any IE or Windows folders, just many organized large
Photoshop files from scans and offline Web folders.

When you say "IE" do you mean Windows Explorer?
Click to expand...

Yep, my bad. I meant "Explorer", that GUI tool with limited file management
functionality.
If I'm copying more than 100,000 files or so, should I always avoid
Windows Explorer to drag/drop or cntrl-c and cntrl-v? I was unaware that
there were problem areas and/or limitations, which is really what this
post was asking to begin with.
Click to expand...

I've run into problems using Explorer or the 'copy' DOS command with just a
few thousand files, especially with long paths or long filenames. Also,
just one error copying one of the files aborts the entire copy process which
leaves you in the state of "Where the f..k am I now" because you waste more
time trying to figure out which files got copies, which ones didn't, having
to redo the copy and answering No for the thousands that did copy so you can
eventually get to later thousands that didn't copy. Explorer sucks for
copies involving LOTS of files. It has no error recovery. It has no means
of resuming by skipping just the existing files. That's why I mentioned
xcopy, robocopy, and xxcopy. xcopy is ran from a DOS prompt. As I recall,
robocopy is also ran from a DOS prompt. I haven't used XXcopy but others
have recommended it.
 
Manny

Not really. It might be confusion over whether it is
AM or PM. You're 12 hours ahead of the rest of us!

--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
????

Where did this poster say anything about USB?

If you don't know the answer, just say so.

In regards to the a file limit, I have moved larger quantities between
drives and seen no issues.I will say that these were either SAN storage or
RAID arrays so I don't know if that is a good qualification. It sounds like
like the drivers for the drive controller or somethin related caching is not
dropping its resources. I can only say that it is not an OS issue that I am
aware of.

--
Manny Borges
MCSE NT4-2003 (+ Security)
MCT, Certified Cheese Master

There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who do understand binary
and those who don't.
 
Its called daylight savings time.

--
Manny Borges
MCSE NT4-2003 (+ Security)
MCT, Certified Cheese Master

There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who do understand binary
and those who don't.
 
Back
Top