11/11/2023 0 Comments Freefilesync keep timestamps![]() ![]() The likelyhood of your timestamp getting corrupted by your storage media > Option III could be faster than option II when used as a consistency check, Why not simply use option II: Compare by "File content" ? If you don't trust your storage media and want to check for consistency, If that is the case, you might also consider to use option I and relax theįileTimeTolerance (see the FFS help under Expert Settings). The comparison you suggest only seems to make sense if you have some timestamp issues. However, when checking consistency, you normally do not expect to have any inconsistencies.Īnd, checking fully consistent sets takes essentially as long in option III as in option II. Option III could be faster than option II when used as a consistency check,īut is only faster in the case you do have inconsistencies (on timestamp). (But, with the timestamp already being the same, how likely is it that if also theįile-size is the same, the content will differ.) The only potential benefit would be, you have a more refined detection of conflicts. Would be about equally fast as option I if the timestamp is different,Īnd about as slow as option II if the timestamp is equal.Īnyway, it is at best as fast as option I, never faster. Obviously, option I compares faster than option II.Ī (presently non-existing) option III, Compare by "File time and then file content", As can be found in the FFS help file under Comparison Settings, you can choose between ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |