The comparison process reduces disk performance, obviously. That's why I would like to pause the comparison while doing some other disk-intensive activity and resume it later on.
Unfortunately, I cannot do this right now. I can Cancel the comparison and start it from the scratch later on but it wastes the already finished part of the work.
Can I get the Pause/Resume feature, please?
Pause/Suspend and Continue/Resume comparison
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 29 Sep 2024
-
- Posts: 2615
- Joined: 22 Aug 2012
What is already available:
Run FFS with background priority
Run FFS with background priority
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: 8 May 2006
Do you know if that actually makes a meaningful difference?
As it is, I had been computing hashes on a slow USB 2.0 drive, & while that was running, accessing, opening files from that drive, was rather slow (as expected).
I hadn't thought about attempting to change the priority level (of the hash).
I suppose... doing so would allow other actions, like an open attempt, to get its interrupt actioned on quicker... ? (I might have to try...)
In any case, IMO, a Pause button would be of benefit.
As it is, I had been computing hashes on a slow USB 2.0 drive, & while that was running, accessing, opening files from that drive, was rather slow (as expected).
I hadn't thought about attempting to change the priority level (of the hash).
I suppose... doing so would allow other actions, like an open attempt, to get its interrupt actioned on quicker... ? (I might have to try...)
In any case, IMO, a Pause button would be of benefit.
-
- Posts: 4296
- Joined: 11 Jun 2019
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 29 Sep 2024
@Plerry this setting needs to be done _before_ I start FreeFileSync. If I forget to set it, I cannot do it later on. If I do it every time, it slows down every time, if if I would run it faster. That is, this doesn't solve the problem I have.
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 18 Apr 2023
I also came here to request this feature. I see I am not the only one, and also I see this has been requested time and again, and is not in the works. A pity. For what is worth, I'll share my use case.
I've been having problems with an external hard disk, and everything copied from that disk is now suspect. So, I have changed my usual syncs to bitwise comparison (Compare by file content) to verify there has been no corruption in the copy process (I know I still have the risk of corruption in the source, but I have other mechanisms in place to deal with that).
But since the folders are big, I'm looking at 8-hours, in some case 24-hours, FFS runs. And this is when I run into the "can't pause" problem that others have reported here. Yes, I *could* have run FFS on background priority, but that doesn't help in this case, since my run started a few hours ago. Yes, I could assign priority on system level. Yes, I can suck it up, which is what I'm doing now. And yes, I *could* have selected smaller portions to compare, but again, this started several hours ago. For these kinds of workloads, a temporary pause would be extra useful.
Thank you for reading.
I've been having problems with an external hard disk, and everything copied from that disk is now suspect. So, I have changed my usual syncs to bitwise comparison (Compare by file content) to verify there has been no corruption in the copy process (I know I still have the risk of corruption in the source, but I have other mechanisms in place to deal with that).
But since the folders are big, I'm looking at 8-hours, in some case 24-hours, FFS runs. And this is when I run into the "can't pause" problem that others have reported here. Yes, I *could* have run FFS on background priority, but that doesn't help in this case, since my run started a few hours ago. Yes, I could assign priority on system level. Yes, I can suck it up, which is what I'm doing now. And yes, I *could* have selected smaller portions to compare, but again, this started several hours ago. For these kinds of workloads, a temporary pause would be extra useful.
Thank you for reading.
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: 8 May 2006
While we're here, Pausing a sync appears to not stop I/O ?
So a pause will pause, but if FFS is dealing with a large file, (if FFS is dealing with any file), it will finish that file before the pause actually pauses (which could be, timely).
So a pause will pause, but if FFS is dealing with a large file, (if FFS is dealing with any file), it will finish that file before the pause actually pauses (which could be, timely).
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: 8 May 2006
"RunWithBackgroundPriority:" says, "Enable this setting to lower FreeFileSync's resource consumption".
Just what resource is lowered, & to what extent?
I ask cause elsewhere I ran into a case where reducing a processes "Priority" did not seem to affect things, where reducing a processes "I/O Priority" did have a noticeable effect (& I'll note it took a reduction to 'Very Low' for that reduction to become apparent).
Just what resource is lowered, & to what extent?
I ask cause elsewhere I ran into a case where reducing a processes "Priority" did not seem to affect things, where reducing a processes "I/O Priority" did have a noticeable effect (& I'll note it took a reduction to 'Very Low' for that reduction to become apparent).
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7357
- Joined: 9 Dec 2007
The setting is about reducing file I/O scheduling priorities.
CPU on the other hand is not (very) important for FFS operation.
That said, the option has only been implemented in Windows/macOS so far, but Linux will be supported, too, in the next version FFS 13.10!
CPU on the other hand is not (very) important for FFS operation.
That said, the option has only been implemented in Windows/macOS so far, but Linux will be supported, too, in the next version FFS 13.10!
