F
Fari Fuladi
I am trying to find out the easiest and cheapest way to
forcefully have the files replicated. Let's assume that I
have a replica set that map to two physical locations:
\\serverfoo\foo
\\serverbar\bar
Now, if for some unknown reason the copy sitting on
serverbar becomes stale, I would like to be able to
programmatically cause the files on the serverfoo to be
replcated back on to serverbar.
The options that I looked at include:
1. a utility that uses TouchFileTime (Win SDK) to change
each file's timestamp.
2. renaming each file to a new name, and then rename it
back to the old name.
3. Renaming the folders to a new name, and rename it back
to its old name
4. Reading 1 byte from each file, and writing it back to
the same file.
Test resutls:
Option 1: I have tested option 1, but it does not seem to
cause replication.
Options 2: it creates entries in the staging directory
which I can presume that it will cause replication. I need
to verify if it indeed replicates the file.
Option 3: This behaves like option 2.
Option 4: It only works the first time that you run the
utility i.e. it creates entries in the staging directory
if it's first time that you are running on a given file.
But, it does not work the 2nd, 3rd, or nth time.
Can anybody think of any other way that replication can
happen forcefully?
thanks,
Fari
forcefully have the files replicated. Let's assume that I
have a replica set that map to two physical locations:
\\serverfoo\foo
\\serverbar\bar
Now, if for some unknown reason the copy sitting on
serverbar becomes stale, I would like to be able to
programmatically cause the files on the serverfoo to be
replcated back on to serverbar.
The options that I looked at include:
1. a utility that uses TouchFileTime (Win SDK) to change
each file's timestamp.
2. renaming each file to a new name, and then rename it
back to the old name.
3. Renaming the folders to a new name, and rename it back
to its old name
4. Reading 1 byte from each file, and writing it back to
the same file.
Test resutls:
Option 1: I have tested option 1, but it does not seem to
cause replication.
Options 2: it creates entries in the staging directory
which I can presume that it will cause replication. I need
to verify if it indeed replicates the file.
Option 3: This behaves like option 2.
Option 4: It only works the first time that you run the
utility i.e. it creates entries in the staging directory
if it's first time that you are running on a given file.
But, it does not work the 2nd, 3rd, or nth time.
Can anybody think of any other way that replication can
happen forcefully?
thanks,
Fari