On Tuesday, 6 March 2012 at 00:29:01 UTC, Jay Norwood wrote:
So here is the output of a batch file I just ran on the ssd
drive for the 1.5GB copy. Robocopy displays that it took
around 14 secs, while the release build of the D commandline
cpd utility took around 12 secs. That's a pretty consistent
result on the ssd drive, which are more sensitive to cpu pr.
06:12 PM
H:\xx8>robocopy /E /NDL /NFL /NC /NS /MT:8 xx8c xx8ca
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROBOCOPY :: Robust File Copy for Windows
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Started : Mon Mar 05 18:12:33 2012
Source : H:\xx8\xx8c\
Dest : H:\xx8\xx8ca\
Files : *.*
Options : *.* /NS /NC /NDL /NFL /S /E /COPY:DAT /MT:8
/R:1000000 /W:30
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100%
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Copied Skipped Mismatch FAILED
Extras
Dirs : 2627 2626 1 0 0
0
Files : 36969 36969 0 0 0
0
Bytes : 1.502 g 1.502 g 0 0 0
0
Times : 0:02:05 0:00:12 0:00:00
0:00:01
Ended : Mon Mar 05 18:12:47 2012
H:\xx8>time /T
06:12 PM
H:\xx8>rmd xx8ca\*
removing: xx8ca\Cross_Tools
removing: xx8ca\eclipse
removing: xx8ca\gnu
removing: xx8ca\PA
finished! time:17889 ms
H:\xx8>time /T
06:13 PM
H:\xx8>cpd xx8c\* xx8ca
copying: xx8c\Cross_Tools
copying: xx8c\eclipse
copying: xx8c\gnu
copying: xx8c\PA
finished! time: 11681 ms
H:\xx8>time /T
06:13 PM
btw, I just ran robocopy with /mt:1, and it took around 42
seconds on the same drive, which is about what I see with the
standard windows copy, including the gui copy. So, at least
for these ssd drives the parallel processing results in
worthwhile speed-ups.
Started : Mon Mar 05 18:24:31 2012
Ended : Mon Mar 05 18:25:13 2012
