Kopieren von großen Dateien macht Probleme?
Hi zusammen
vielleicht hat jemand von euch den entscheidenden Hinweis – ich experimentiere hier laufend ohne Erfolg.
Gegeben:
- Win10-PC, daran angeschlossen 2 USB-Platten. USB ist USB-2.0. Eine als Ziel, die andere als Quelle. Beide NTFS.
- die Dateien sollen als Backup von einer zur anderen HDD kopiert werden
- als Programm soll RoboCopy (aus einer Batch-Datei) kopiert werden
Die Einstellungen sollten Ok sein – alle Kopien mit Dateien von 1-10Mb oder so (also kleiner) laufen Ok.
Problem bei Dateien ca. ab 1Gb und größer:
- der Kopiervorgang läuft an (wie weit er kommt ist jeweils unterschiedlich)
- an der Festplatten-LED der Quell-Platte sieht man, dass nach einiger Zeit der Lesevorgang für ca. 20sek. pausiert und dann weitergeht
- in praktisch jedem Fall bricht die Übertragung irgenndwann ab und meldet einen Hardware-Fehler.
- die Quellplatte wurde mit chkdsk /r /f überprüft ohne Fehler.
Ich habe so einen leisen Verdacht (ohne Beweis), dass da irgendein Buffer-Speicher überläuft oder so – vielleicht wird auch schneller von der Quelle gelesen als auf das Ziel geschrieben – irgendwas – genau da kommt ich nicht weiter.
Habt ihr einen Tip ?
(1 votes)
Loading...
You started all this as an admin, right? If you run it without Robocopy then? As a simple copy paste?
Otherwise:
/LOG+:= Write a log file in the specified path
copy paste: same effect – the copy always makes the described breaks. same error: 0x800701e3
Chat GPT:
Go all this through the drivers if necessary. Do you know how old the plate is? Otherwise try another if present
Further success
is very miserable. In the meantime, I suspected the USB port on the PC. As soon as a writing process goes to the target plate (also to the new one), the data rate in the task manager goes to 100% and remains there (even if nothing is written anymore). There’s something else I need to test on another PC.
Thank you for your ideas.
First result: even with the new plate the same errors are there – so it was not the old target plate. The source plate was tested with chkdsk /f /r – so it should not be. The effect with the break when reading from the source plate has not changed.
Nevertheless, some files have been copied earlier (about 30% of the total volume). I’ll check that out. Among them were also files that could not be copied before – so slowly I get gray hair. It doesn’t make any sense.
Suspicion still: something on the driver of the source plate (because the target plate is different now) that only works with large files.
Therefore, I do another attempt in which I massively drossle the data throughput in Robocopy.
Next try: I do the whole thing with the second source plate (not yet made with this target plate), but I do not expect a change. It takes hours again.
Then: another suspicion: the USB electronics of the hard drive also plays in. Could also be expanded and connected with another SATA adapter. But it’s just an emergency solution. However, why should two different plates show similar effects?
PS: the update and new drivers. The PC has been frozen several times during the first copy paste attempts so that it had to be turned off hard. Unfortunately, I don’t have another PC right now. At the moment the copy is running (with error messages as before).
I’m staying on it and I’m trying to drive another PC and keep going. Please be patient.
Win updates (because of the drivers) must always be taken care of. It’s fast. I’m pushing the thumbs
I’m just over: factory new HDD connected – let’s see. However, Win has installed a completely new update that he is currently on. With such background updates I’ve had problems more often. Drives high and installed – takes longer.
Hmm otherwise get you ne SSD and try to push the data on it. Emergency only in parts
chkdsk etc. are already done. AV is not running.
However, the plates are really old – that is why the data should be recopied.
Try Freeware Personal Backup with validity check.
Hi Mauritanian
I went explicitly to RoboCopy because
Nevertheless – good idea – but not for this case.
I meant that the software is a one-off solution for exactly this copying problem. Just because it means backup, it can be more than backup.
NAS behind it is a wide country and I never tested PB. Personally, I need backups primarily to correct your own mistakes. That is, I need the pre-version because I shot the current version personally once more. 😉
This is a very personal way of working.
Basically, I have the same subject. Huge files. With me, it’s a handful of videos and virtual machines when Win 10 runs on it, the right weights become. Win 7 VM goes like this, Win XP VM is quite slim.
In total, there are not many files in number, but quite a lot of GBs.
I copy with Personal Backup once a month. I’m sure the giants are 1:1. That means I can take the files from the backup and copy them back to my HD. PB also encrypts it to me, i.e. I don’t have to pay extra attention to the data carrier, which is getting out of it. Yeah, it takes a long time.
I have my daily work on about a VM as a small backup of about 200 MB as a batch that can write out on the host. It goes through in 6 seconds. Also with PB because you can configure it so well after file extensions and exclude div temp files.
You’re right – you can also be that I’m too far again (see specialist informatics). That’s why I’m talking about a LAN with three NAS, that’s why there’s a server next and then the usual home periphery.
Nevertheless, first of all: I want to get the data from (it was five) two tracked HDDs and sort it in.
Thanks for the ideas – maybe I can do something about it.
Sounds for me to a defective plate (you mean you only checked the source plate, look at the target device) or it’s the USB connection. So the cable (more unlikely) or the hardware that makes USB SATA (or IDE)
I’d see that. As soon as the cache becomes too small for the writing action, the plate can no longer hold fast enough.
Am still on testing – see comments on
is very miserable. In the meantime, I suspected the USB port on the PC. As soon as a writing process goes to the target plate (also to the new one), the data rate in the task manager goes to 100% and remains there (even if nothing is written anymore). There’s something else I need to test on another PC.
Thank you for your ideas.