[THIN] Re: ot: easy question
- From: "Schutte, Keith [EPT/FLO]" <KSchutte@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:38:54 -0400
But what happens if you redirect the output of xcopy to a file so the CMD
window updates are not a factor? Do an xcopy source dest > output.txt?
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Mangan [mailto:tmangan@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 2:34 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: ot: easy question
Not so easy. At least if you test it.
Windows 2000 Server, Dual Processor machine with plenty of memory, disk, no
users.
Explorer copy of "Program Files" (186MB): 61 seconds
CMD window Xcopy of "Program Files" (186MB): 79 seconds
Who'd of thunk? Smaller folders appeared faster via Xcopy, however. I think
that the CMD window is inefficient at displaying all those filenames. I
suspect different systems may have different results as well.
tim
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
Of Michael Boggan
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 1:18 PM
To: 'THIN'
Subject: [THIN] ot: easy question
Is copy or xcopy faster then doing a cut and paste in windows?
_________________________________
Michael Boggan
Network Engineer/Citrix Admin
Virtual Desktop Inc.
Dallas, Texas
Ph: (972) 960-6400
Fax: (972) 960-6445
email: mboggan@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.virtualdesktopinc.com <http://www.virtualdesktopinc.com>
_________________________________
Other related posts:
