Copy VS. Move command

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

When moving files, which command (move or copy) gets files moved at a faster
rate? Why?


Thanks!
 
Jerry

If you copy files from location A to location B, and you only want the files
to appear at B, then you will have to delete the files as A.. this process
takes a while, but the advantage is that you can test the moved files (make
sure that the files have moved, and not just a list of shortcuts to the
originals at A) before deletion

If you move files from location A to location B, there is no process after..
job done..
except if a fault develops in the system as you are doing it, in which case
you have no files to worry about any more..
 
So you are saying a move is faster? I don't mean in terms of conveniance, I
mean in terms of raw data transfer speed?
 
So you are saying a move is faster? I don't mean in terms of conveniance, I
mean in terms of raw data transfer speed?
Click to expand...

If the move is on the same drive then move is much faster as the only
operation that needs to be performed is an update to the file table. The
actual bytes on the HD don't need to actually be written. For a copy,
obviously a full new copy of the file needs to be made so that is slower.
If you are talking copy vs move to a different HD then the data transfer
speed should be the same either way, but the copy operation will complete
faster as it doesn't also have to remove the file from the original
location.
--
Tom Porterfield
MS-MVP Windows
http://support.telop.org

Please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup only.
 
Thanks Tom!

Tom Porterfield said:
If the move is on the same drive then move is much faster as the only
operation that needs to be performed is an update to the file table. The
actual bytes on the HD don't need to actually be written. For a copy,
obviously a full new copy of the file needs to be made so that is slower.
If you are talking copy vs move to a different HD then the data transfer
speed should be the same either way, but the copy operation will complete
faster as it doesn't also have to remove the file from the original
location.
--
Tom Porterfield
MS-MVP Windows
http://support.telop.org

Please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup only.
Click to expand...
 
Tom said:
If the move is on the same drive then move is much faster as the only
operation that needs to be performed is an update to the file table. The
actual bytes on the HD don't need to actually be written. For a copy,
obviously a full new copy of the file needs to be made so that is slower.
If you are talking copy vs move to a different HD then the data transfer
speed should be the same either way, but the copy operation will complete
faster as it doesn't also have to remove the file from the original
location.
Click to expand...


I thought that a 'move' under windows XP with NTFS just moved the
pointer to the file - no?
 
I thought that a 'move' under windows XP with NTFS just moved the
pointer to the file - no?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I said. A move on the same drive since it only updates
the file table. Obviously a move to a different drive would require more
than that.
--
Tom Porterfield
MS-MVP Windows
http://support.telop.org

Please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup only.
 
Back
Top