hi,
Just found out about FFS and i think it's a great program and need some help
here.
I am trying to schedule a weekly sync from my 20 client to my 1 single file
server.
but when 1 client is running the sync, the other client had to halt and wait
because of the folder in the file server still has the sync.ffs_lock.
the second and so on client stops at the "locking the folder" things.
and I am syncing from client -> to-> server.
is there any solution ?
and how do you make the RTS into a service in WinXP sp3 ?
Thank You
multiple client sync to 1 folder in 1 server
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 25 Apr 2012
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7279
- Joined: 9 Dec 2007
Is there a problem with the locking mechanism? FFS doesn't allow multiple sync
jobs access a directory at the same time which is a feature, not a bug.
> how do you make the RTS into a service in WinXP sp3 ?
See the helpfile for a walkthrough. If you are the single user of the system,
better simply put a RTS link into autostart folder instead.
jobs access a directory at the same time which is a feature, not a bug.
> how do you make the RTS into a service in WinXP sp3 ?
See the helpfile for a walkthrough. If you are the single user of the system,
better simply put a RTS link into autostart folder instead.
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 25 Apr 2012
Ah thank you for the reply, and yes i' having trouble with the locking
mechanism.
is it possible to sync without having to lock the directory ? is it possible
to disable that feature ?j
because in my situation it's hard to manage 70 pcs that have to be updated on
a weekly basis and on some special cases....... daily basis.
Because I find it more convenient for the client to sync to the server using
the runsilent.vbs and the WinXP schedule point, and it's running without
having to disrupts the client.
And with 70 pcs running at the same time, i find it hard to sync from the
server at the same time to all the clients, it's giving the server a heavy
load.
mechanism.
is it possible to sync without having to lock the directory ? is it possible
to disable that feature ?j
because in my situation it's hard to manage 70 pcs that have to be updated on
a weekly basis and on some special cases....... daily basis.
Because I find it more convenient for the client to sync to the server using
the runsilent.vbs and the WinXP schedule point, and it's running without
having to disrupts the client.
And with 70 pcs running at the same time, i find it hard to sync from the
server at the same time to all the clients, it's giving the server a heavy
load.
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7279
- Joined: 9 Dec 2007
Why is the locking mechanism a problem in your scenario? Are you trying to
sync the 70 PCs against the very same directory? Or do you have a master -
slave setup, where the single master is read from only, while it's 70 targets
are written?
sync the 70 PCs against the very same directory? Or do you have a master -
slave setup, where the single master is read from only, while it's 70 targets
are written?
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 25 Apr 2012
Yes, 70 PC's sync to 1 directory at the same time, because in my situation
it's better if I avoid sharing my clients, where the share would be read and
write.
While if i sync from client to server, i am only sharing my server read only.
It's not 70 target, the target would me the server, because if possible i
would like to sync from client -> server, so that i could make a schedule for
each client at a different time in each floor.
thanks.
it's better if I avoid sharing my clients, where the share would be read and
write.
While if i sync from client to server, i am only sharing my server read only.
It's not 70 target, the target would me the server, because if possible i
would like to sync from client -> server, so that i could make a schedule for
each client at a different time in each floor.
thanks.
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7279
- Joined: 9 Dec 2007
I'm not sure I understood completely what you are trying to do: Do you have a
read-only server which will be synced in mirror mode to 70 write-only targets?
Because if not, a lock file that serializes access to the server is exactly
what you need. You wouldn't want spurious access denied error message from one
sync because another session is writing a file or worse uses VSS to forcefully
copy an incomplete file. If you use "automatic" mode the lock file also guards
access to the sync.ffs_db files.
read-only server which will be synced in mirror mode to 70 write-only targets?
Because if not, a lock file that serializes access to the server is exactly
what you need. You wouldn't want spurious access denied error message from one
sync because another session is writing a file or worse uses VSS to forcefully
copy an incomplete file. If you use "automatic" mode the lock file also guards
access to the sync.ffs_db files.