Robocopy question using Vista

I use robocopy to backup critical files to my server each night (or
morning). And it works very well. However, I've noticed that if I run the
exact same routine 2 times in a row, it still copies some number of files
each time. Granted it's a small number of files (say 6 out of 200). I'm
just curious if anyone else has noticed this behavior and if you have any
ideas why this happens. I know that none of the files have changed between
to successive runs. I have included the contents of my batch file below
(it's really quite simple):

@echo off
echo .
echo Begin Synchronizing...
echo .
cd c:\Scripts
echo Synchronizing Foo
robocopy "c:\Users\owner\documents\Foo" "\\avalon\Bar" /mir /log:sync.log


Any ideas?

Dick

"Theory of Everything" <> wrote in message
news:48d00df1$...
> not answering directly to your question, but have you seen this?
>
> http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/0...free-download/
>
>
>
> "Dick" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> I use robocopy to backup critical files to my server each night (or
>> morning). And it works very well. However, I've noticed that if I run
>> the exact same routine 2 times in a row, it still copies some number of
>> files each time. Granted it's a small number of files (say 6 out of
>> 200). I'm just curious if anyone else has noticed this behavior and if
>> you have any ideas why this happens. I know that none of the files have
>> changed between to successive runs. I have included the contents of my
>> batch file below (it's really quite simple):
>>
>> @echo off
>> echo .
>> echo Begin Synchronizing...
>> echo .
>> cd c:\Scripts
>> echo Synchronizing Foo
>> robocopy "c:\Users\owner\documents\Foo" "\\avalon\Bar" /mir /log:sync.log
>>
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> Dick
>>

Thanks Theory,

Yes, I have seen that. But, as you said, it doesn't answer my question.

Dick

Dick;837500 Wrote:
> I use robocopy to backup critical files to my server each night (or
> morning). And it works very well. However, I've noticed that if I run
> the
> exact same routine 2 times in a row, it still copies some number of
> files
> each time. Granted it's a small number of files (say 6 out of 200). I'm
> just curious if anyone else has noticed this behavior and if you have
> any
> ideas why this happens. I know that none of the files have changed
> between
> to successive runs. I have included the contents of my batch file below
> (it's really quite simple):
>
> @echo off
> echo .
> echo Begin Synchronizing...
> echo .
> cd c:\Scripts
> echo Synchronizing Foo
> robocopy "c:\Users\owner\documents\Foo" "\\avalon\Bar" /mir
> /log:sync.log
>
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Dick

By any chance, those few files that get re-copied, do they change in
some way on a regular basis? Sounds like Robocopy sees them as being
written to again, thus needing to re-copy them.


--
pweegar

"Theory of Everything" <> wrote in message
news:48d00df1$...
> not answering directly to your question, but have you seen this?
>
> http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/0...free-download/
>
>
>
No wonder why you have so much trouble with Vista. You can't even respond
to a post correctly. My advice is to get a book on "Vista for Retards"
study real hard and within 6 years you should have a basic understanding of
Vista so you can perform very basic tasks like understanding Icons, clicking
on icons, running simple programs, etc......

Theory of Stupidity & Bullshit wrote:
> There is a very simple way to see who knows more about vista.

That is easy! Who can get one simple install of Vista to run properly.
Guess what...you lost...months ago!
>
>
> but you are free to make a fool of yourself if you really really want it
> so bad! lol
>
>Yes you are and you have and proly will continue making a complete and utter fool out of yourself in here.

"Theory of Everything" <> wrote in message
news:48d03058$...
> There is a very simple way to see who knows more about vista.
>
> lets have the group decide who knows vista better, you or me....
>

You really sound like a loser. Who the hell would want to prove anything to
an idiot like you? Go back to your Sheep and leave this group right away.
Take that idiot Ringmaster with you. He is the group ****tard and you are
closing in very fast.

"Theory of Everything" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Ahhh spanky da moron is here.. no need to say anything. the stench from
> your dead rotting carcass is passing through the internet.

So your head being placed far up your ass, you think you can smell the
internet? Better take more drugs.


>
> I am merely explaining that there is a way to prove his hypothesis, that
> he knows more about vista than me.
> If he dares.. lol

Sorry you don't know ****. Why would anyone want to prove anything you
request? You are just a ****ing moron.


>
> Now eat your banana from the rear end.

Sorry. I don't follow your family rules.

"pweegar" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Dick;837500 Wrote:
>> I use robocopy to backup critical files to my server each night (or
>> morning). And it works very well. However, I've noticed that if I run
>> the
>> exact same routine 2 times in a row, it still copies some number of
>> files
>> each time. Granted it's a small number of files (say 6 out of 200). I'm
>> just curious if anyone else has noticed this behavior and if you have
>> any
>> ideas why this happens. I know that none of the files have changed
>> between
>> to successive runs. I have included the contents of my batch file below
>> (it's really quite simple):
>>
>> @echo off
>> echo .
>> echo Begin Synchronizing...
>> echo .
>> cd c:\Scripts
>> echo Synchronizing Foo
>> robocopy "c:\Users\owner\documents\Foo" "\\avalon\Bar" /mir
>> /log:sync.log
>>
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> Dick
>
> By any chance, those few files that get re-copied, do they change in
> some way on a regular basis? Sounds like Robocopy sees them as being
> written to again, thus needing to re-copy them.
>
>
> --
> pweegar

pweegar,

No, as I said in the first post I simply run the bat file and then run it
again and I notice that some files are recopied. I first thought that it
might have someting to do with the archive bit, but that doesn't seem to be
the case upon further inspection. It appears to do no harm, I just wondered
if anyone knew why some files are recopied.

Dick

"Dick" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I use robocopy to backup critical files to my server each night (or
>morning). And it works very well. However, I've noticed that if I run the
>exact same routine 2 times in a row, it still copies some number of files
>each time. Granted it's a small number of files (say 6 out of 200). I'm
>just curious if anyone else has noticed this behavior and if you have any
>ideas why this happens. I know that none of the files have changed between
>to successive runs. I have included the contents of my batch file below
>(it's really quite simple):
>
> @echo off
> echo .
> echo Begin Synchronizing...
> echo .
> cd c:\Scripts
> echo Synchronizing Foo
> robocopy "c:\Users\owner\documents\Foo" "\\avalon\Bar" /mir /log:sync.log

Is it copying the other way though? Is it mirroring back to the original
folder? If it is, it could be doing that as the Modified Dates on the new
copies are later than the originals.

I never use the /MIR switch, as it is too basic. Does it even cater for
newer file versions? If not, you fail to back up valuable data. I use
XXCOPY now a lot more, as it has more options, and can copy over File
Created, Modified and Last Accessed timestamps on files, and all three
timestamps on folders too. The free version prompts you though, so I still
use Robocopy a lot on all scheduled scripting.

ss.

"Warp 10" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I suspect that some files are locked because vista is reading them, and
>robocopy "chokes" on those and aborts the procedure,
> the first time around.

It won't be anything to do with that, as the files can still be read, and he
said that they are being re-copied.

> I have seen that with vista its much harder to unlock files than with
> xp... I use a program called unlocker, but it cant do all vista files as
> it could wo with xp.

That Unlocker thing sucks, is it requires backup and debug privileges, so
can only be run as administrator, in XP, or you have to seriously weaken
security to give user accounts those privileges (massive no-no). It might
be handy for newbies, but that way of using the computer would lead to bad
security and being affected by malware. That is the whole reason UAC came
about.

ss.