Copy with verify per block

Richard Foersom wrote in news:1195393742_465@vo.lu
> With Windows (2000 or XP) is there a way to perform verify and rewrite
> as part of copy operations?
>
> What I am looking for is some option where for each e.g. 1MB written it
> is check read and rewritten in case of error.
>
> On command line I have tried copy with option /v. This seems to verify
> after complete copy. Errors are reported but there are no retry of
> writing the blocks found to be wrong.
>
> If not part of Windows is there some utility with copy operation like
> that I can use?

> This is to debug an unreliable interface not a faulty drive.

Assuming IDE, make sure it runs in UDMA mode.
The interface will not be allowed to corrupt the data.

>
> TIA, Richard
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

"Richard Foersom" <r.nojunk.foersom.TakeThisOut@gmail.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:1195393742_465@vo.lu...
> With Windows (2000 or XP) is there a way to perform verify and rewrite
> as part of copy operations?
>
> What I am looking for is some option where for each e.g. 1MB written it
> is check read and rewritten in case of error.
>
> On command line I have tried copy with option /v. This seems to verify
> after complete copy. Errors are reported but there are no retry of
> writing the blocks found to be wrong.
>
> If not part of Windows is there some utility with copy operation like
> that I can use?
>
> This is to debug an unreliable interface not a faulty drive.
>
> TIA, Richard

Why don't you write your own copy program that
1) copies 1MB of data
2) flushes the I/O
3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
4) repeats until all data is copied?

Regards,
Alvin.
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Previously Alvin Andries <Alvin_Andries.no_spam.RemoveThis@no.spam.versateladsl.be> wrote:

> "Richard Foersom" <r.nojunk.foersom.RemoveThis@gmail.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:1195393742_465@vo.lu...
>> With Windows (2000 or XP) is there a way to perform verify and rewrite
>> as part of copy operations?
>>
>> What I am looking for is some option where for each e.g. 1MB written it
>> is check read and rewritten in case of error.
>>
>> On command line I have tried copy with option /v. This seems to verify
>> after complete copy. Errors are reported but there are no retry of
>> writing the blocks found to be wrong.
>>
>> If not part of Windows is there some utility with copy operation like
>> that I can use?
>>
>> This is to debug an unreliable interface not a faulty drive.
>>
>> TIA, Richard

> Why don't you write your own copy program that
> 1) copies 1MB of data
> 2) flushes the I/O
> 3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
> 4) repeats until all data is copied?

This will still read from cache.

Arno
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

"Arno Wagner" <me DeleteThis @privacy.net> wrote in message
news:5qcqoqFv7cmfU1@mid.individual.net...
> Previously Alvin Andries <Alvin_Andries.no_spam DeleteThis @no.spam.versateladsl.be>
wrote:
>
> > "Richard Foersom" <r.nojunk.foersom DeleteThis @gmail.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:1195393742_465@vo.lu...
> >> With Windows (2000 or XP) is there a way to perform verify and rewrite
> >> as part of copy operations?
> >>
> >> What I am looking for is some option where for each e.g. 1MB written it
> >> is check read and rewritten in case of error.
> >>
> >> On command line I have tried copy with option /v. This seems to verify
> >> after complete copy. Errors are reported but there are no retry of
> >> writing the blocks found to be wrong.
> >>
> >> If not part of Windows is there some utility with copy operation like
> >> that I can use?
> >>
> >> This is to debug an unreliable interface not a faulty drive.
> >>
> >> TIA, Richard
>
> > Why don't you write your own copy program that
> > 1) copies 1MB of data
> > 2) flushes the I/O
> > 3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
> > 4) repeats until all data is copied?
>
> This will still read from cache.
>
> Arno

Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a command
to do this for removable storage.

Alvin.
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

"Alvin Andries" <Alvin_Andries.no_spam.DeleteThis@no.spam.versateladsl.be> wrote in message
news:47433030$0$12706$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
>
> "Arno Wagner" <me.DeleteThis@privacy.net> wrote in message news:5qcqoqFv7cmfU1@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> > Why don't you write your own copy program that
>> > 1) copies 1MB of data
>> > 2) flushes the I/O
>> > 3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
>> > 4) repeats until all data is copied?
>>
>> This will still read from cache.
>>
Arnie is a certified moron.
>
In Windows, use FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING to bypass the OS cache.
However, the disk can still read from the cache (several MB now),
and only SCSI has an option to bypass the cache on reads. Does SATA2?

> Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a command
> to do this for removable storage.

Safe Removal, or SysInternal's sync.
>
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Previously Alvin Andries <Alvin_Andries.no_spam.RemoveThis@no.spam.versateladsl.be> wrote:

> "Arno Wagner" <me.RemoveThis@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:5qcqoqFv7cmfU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Previously Alvin Andries <Alvin_Andries.no_spam.RemoveThis@no.spam.versateladsl.be>
> wrote:
>>
>> > "Richard Foersom" <r.nojunk.foersom.RemoveThis@gmail.nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1195393742_465@vo.lu...
>> >> With Windows (2000 or XP) is there a way to perform verify and rewrite
>> >> as part of copy operations?
>> >>
>> >> What I am looking for is some option where for each e.g. 1MB written it
>> >> is check read and rewritten in case of error.
>> >>
>> >> On command line I have tried copy with option /v. This seems to verify
>> >> after complete copy. Errors are reported but there are no retry of
>> >> writing the blocks found to be wrong.
>> >>
>> >> If not part of Windows is there some utility with copy operation like
>> >> that I can use?
>> >>
>> >> This is to debug an unreliable interface not a faulty drive.
>> >>
>> >> TIA, Richard
>>
>> > Why don't you write your own copy program that
>> > 1) copies 1MB of data
>> > 2) flushes the I/O
>> > 3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
>> > 4) repeats until all data is copied?
>>
>> This will still read from cache.
>>
>> Arno

> Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a
> command to do this for removable storage.

This does flush the buffer to disk, but does not clear the read cache.
I am not aware of eny command that emties the read cache.

Arno
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Arno Wagner wrote in news:5qi0scFvm4qpU1@mid.individual.net
> Previously Alvin Andries Alvin_Andries.no_spam DeleteThis @no.spam.versateladsl.be wrote:
> > "Arno Wagner" me DeleteThis @privacy.net> wrote in message news:5qcqoqFv7cmfU1@mid.individual.net...
> > > Previously Alvin Andries Alvin_Andries.no_spam DeleteThis @no.spam.versateladsl.be wrote:
> > > > "Richard Foersom" r.nojunk.foersom DeleteThis @gmail.nowhere.com> wrote in message news:1195393742_465@vo.lu...
> > > > > With Windows (2000 or XP) is there a way to perform verify and rewrite
> > > > > as part of copy operations?
> > > > >
> > > > > What I am looking for is some option where for each e.g. 1MB written
> > > > > it is check read and rewritten in case of error.
> > > > >
> > > > > On command line I have tried copy with option /v. This seems to verify
> > > > > after complete copy. Errors are reported but there are no retry of
> > > > > writing the blocks found to be wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > If not part of Windows is there some utility with copy operation like
> > > > > that I can use?
> > > > >
> > > > > This is to debug an unreliable interface not a faulty drive.
> > > > >
> > > > > TIA, Richard
> > >
> > > > Why don't you write your own copy program that
> > > > 1) copies 1MB of data
> > > > 2) flushes the I/O
> > > > 3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
> > > > 4) repeats until all data is copied?
> > >
> > > This will still read from cache.
> > >
> > > Arno
>
> > Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a
> > command to do this for removable storage.
>
> This does flush the buffer to disk, but does not clear the read cache.

> I am not aware of eny command that emties the read cache.

That's nicer words for you being clueless, babblebot.
The system cache is not the problem as long you can bypass it.

>
> Arno
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to.TakeThisOut@myweb.nl> schreef in berichtnieuws
47444b65$0$47155$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

> > > Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a
> > > command to do this for removable storage.
> >
> > This does flush the buffer to disk, but does not clear the read cache.
>
> > I am not aware of eny command that emties the read cache.
>
> That's nicer words for you being clueless, babblebot.
> The system cache is not the problem as long you can bypass it.

Dear Folkert,

Although your claim is quite true its allso quite worthless to the
poster(s), in more ways than one :

Apart from making it look like you know something the poster(s) do(es) not,
*but not posting that information*, you allso use a condition in your
statement that could, for all we know, evaluate to "false".

You seem to have no problem with defining the a poster as "clueless". But
than how should we define you ? Especially when seeing that your
bad-mouthing is your *only* response in this thread.

Regards,
R.Wieser
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Previously R.Wieser <address.TakeThisOut@not.available> wrote:

> Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to.TakeThisOut@myweb.nl> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 47444b65$0$47155$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

>> > > Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a
>> > > command to do this for removable storage.
>> >
>> > This does flush the buffer to disk, but does not clear the read cache.
>>
>> > I am not aware of eny command that emties the read cache.
>>
>> That's nicer words for you being clueless, babblebot.
>> The system cache is not the problem as long you can bypass it.

> Dear Folkert,

> Although your claim is quite true its allso quite worthless to the
> poster(s), in more ways than one :

> Apart from making it look like you know something the poster(s)
> do(es) not, *but not posting that information*, you allso use a
> condition in your statement that could, for all we know, evaluate to
> "false".

> You seem to have no problem with defining the a poster as
> "clueless". But than how should we define you ? Especially when
> seeing that your bad-mouthing is your *only* response in this
> thread.

It is even more funny: Folkert is not even creative enough to do his
own insults: "babblebot" is stolen from me. It amuses me no end
whenever I see him using it on me.

And the "as long as you can evade the problem, the problem is not an
issue" is typical for him. It allows him to claim superiority without
ever having to give any information that could expose his utter and
complete incompetence.

Just add him to your killfile. I did so a long time ago.

Arno
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

R.Wieser wrote in news:47456335$0$4612$e4fe514c@dreader32.news.xs4all.nl
> Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws 47444b65$0$47155$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
>
> > > > Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a
> > > > command to do this for removable storage.
> > >
> > > This does flush the buffer to disk, but does not clear the read cache.
> >
> > > I am not aware of eny command that emties the read cache.
> >
> > That's nicer words for you being clueless, babblebot.
> > The system cache is not the problem as long you can bypass it.

> Dear Folkert,

Aah yes, a "Dear Folkert" post. How refreshing.

>
> Although your claim is quite true its allso quite worthless to the
> poster(s), in more ways than one :
>
> Apart from making it look like you know something the poster(s) do(es)
> not, *but not posting that information*, you allso use a condition in your
> statement that could, for all we know, evaluate to "false".
>
> You seem to have no problem with defining the a poster as "clueless".
> But than how should we define you ?

> Especially when seeing that your bad-mouthing is your *only* response
> in this thread.

Apart from that being a blatant lie, now see how that makes you soo very
much different from me.

Since Eric Gisin already gave the same answer, which you well know,
it's rather blatantly obvious what you are trying to do here, Troll.

Btw, you make the same spelling mistakes as the Wagner Troll.
Now why is that.

>
> Regards,
> R.Wieser
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Just so this message bypasses Arnies killfile and make him curl-up and die.

Eric Gisin wrote in news:13k6l18hs28uea6@corp.supernews.com
> "Alvin Andries" wrote in message news:47433030$0$12706$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
> > "Arno Wagner" me.RemoveThis@privacy.net> wrote in message news:5qcqoqFv7cmfU1@mid.individual.net...
> > >
> > > > Why don't you write your own copy program that
> > > > 1) copies 1MB of data
> > > > 2) flushes the I/O
> > > > 3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
> > > > 4) repeats until all data is copied?
> > >
> > > This will still read from cache.
> > >
> Arnie is a certified moron.
> >
> In Windows, use FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING to bypass the OS cache.
> However, the disk can still read from the cache (several MB now),
> and only SCSI has an option to bypass the cache on reads. Does SATA2?
>
> > Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a command
> > to do this for removable storage.
>
> Safe Removal, or SysInternal's sync.
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Previously ByPass <bash.TakeThisOut@suckers.au> wrote:
> Just so this message bypasses Arnies killfile and make him curl-up and die.

I find it fascinating that you consider me important enough
to go to all this trouble just to get a simple message to me.

May I suggest that ignoring me would probably be more healthy
for you?

Arno


> Eric Gisin wrote in news:13k6l18hs28uea6@corp.supernews.com
>> "Alvin Andries" wrote in message news:47433030$0$12706$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
>> > "Arno Wagner" me.TakeThisOut@privacy.net> wrote in message news:5qcqoqFv7cmfU1@mid.individual.net...
>> > >
>> > > > Why don't you write your own copy program that
>> > > > 1) copies 1MB of data
>> > > > 2) flushes the I/O
>> > > > 3) reads the 1MB from the destination file and compares it
>> > > > 4) repeats until all data is copied?
>> > >
>> > > This will still read from cache.
>> > >
>> Arnie is a certified moron.
>> >
>> In Windows, use FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING to bypass the OS cache.
>> However, the disk can still read from the cache (several MB now),
>> and only SCSI has an option to bypass the cache on reads. Does SATA2?
>>
>> > Can't you flush the cache like "sync" under UNIX? I think I recall a command
>> > to do this for removable storage.
>>
>> Safe Removal, or SysInternal's sync.
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block 

Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to.DeleteThis@myweb.nl> schreef in berichtnieuws
47459920$1$47135$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

> > Although your claim is quite true its allso quite worthless to the
> > poster(s), in more ways than one :
> >
> > Apart from making it look like you know something the poster(s) do(es)
> > not, *but not posting that information*, you allso use a condition in
your
> > statement that could, for all we know, evaluate to "false".
> >
> > You seem to have no problem with defining the a poster as "clueless".
> > But than how should we define you ?
>
> > Especially when seeing that your bad-mouthing is your *only* response
> > in this thread.
>
> Apart from that being a blatant lie,

Really ? From your own message (the one I responded to) :
-----
Arno Wagner wrote in news:5qi0scFvm4qpU1@mid.individual.net
> Previously Alvin Andries Alvin_Andries.no_spam.DeleteThis@no.spam.versateladsl.be
wrote:
> > "Arno Wagner" me.DeleteThis@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:5qcqoqFv7cmfU1@mid.individual.net...
> > > Previously Alvin Andries Alvin_Andries.no_spam.DeleteThis@no.spam.versateladsl.be
wrote:
> > > > "Richard Foersom" r.nojunk.foersom.DeleteThis@gmail.nowhere.com> wrote in
message news:1195393742_465@vo.lu...
> > > > > With Windows (2000 or XP) is there a way to perform verify and
rewrite
> > > > > as part of copy operations?
-----
Can you point me where you name is in there ? I thought so.

> now see how that makes you soo very
> much different from me.

If it where true we could have discussed a bit about it. But as it does not
seem to be ...

> Since Eric Gisin already gave the same answer, which you well know,

Oh my, you can *mindread* ? Can you tell me how you do that, as I hear
lots of people can, like you, but I still have not learned that trick.

> it's rather blatantly obvious what you are trying to do here, Troll.

Really ? But if my actions (as you percieve them anyway) are so
"blatantly obvious", what do you call your own ?

You know, I find it quite remarkable that people who claim that they can
peer into the souls and thoughts of people they just met and know virtually
*nothing* about are mostly not able (or willing) to look into their own.

First get your facts straight, and only than try to conclude on them.
Currently you're not even on quicksand, but in pure water.

Ofcourse, if you think that only truth in this world are the thoughts that
bounce between your ears you must either be the happiest, or the saddest
person on this world. But for some reason I don't think you're not happy
....

> Btw, you make the same spelling mistakes as the Wagner Troll.
> Now why is that.

I don't know ? I'm a two-finger typer, and have a small dislexia problem.
How many people on this earth could do & have the same ? And you base
your "you must be the same person" on *that* ?

You know, you made me smile ...

Regards,
R.Wieser
 >> Stay informed about: Copy with verify per block