Batch files execution

[Valerie]

XP Home sp.2 fully updated.

Hypothetical situation. Lots of file transfers over a network. Three batch files used for copying, each file takes say 45 mins to run individually. Obviously that's over two hours if the files are run consecutively.

If all three files are started at one time (three cmd.exe's running) would there be an appreciable time saving?

Thanks

[Arie]

If you use default DOS commands, no. If you would use specific copy tools, then maybe yes. Terracopy is something which comes to mind. Never really used it myself, don't know if it can be scripted, but it might give you a pointer in the right direction.

[Yzöwl]

Simultaneous running commands will generally work quicker than consecutively running ones.

Your biggest problem would more likely be with local hard drive head movement and writing to more than one network location at the same time.

Trying it is your only sure fire way, but ensure that you play safe and use something like robocopy with its switches for handling verification and/or errors.

To do it I would create a master batch file and run my three individual copy batches from it.

for example:

START "" %comspec% /c docopy1.cmd
START "" %comspec% /c docopy2.cmd
START "" %comspec% /c docopy3.cmd

[Valerie]

Thank you both - I will investigate Terracopy and Robocopy.

V..

[jaclaz]

As a side note, you may be interested in this (NOT faster):

http://www.ruahine.com/ycopy-file-copy-utility.html

Also, IF the bottleneck is the network, you may want to compress the files locally into a (temporary) archive, then transfer the archive, this usually gives better performance when compared to a number of small files...

jaclaz

[XP_2600]

I agree with jaclaz compressing it locally before transfer it, seems the best solution, also i don't think a batch contain three batches gonna be good, cause each batch will take its own time to open a session and start copy and so on.

[Yzöwl]

Note that I said generally and also said that the only sure fire way would be to try it. On occasions when I have it has been.

Other things tried too have been using additional copies of the command interpreter in different locations and running a different one for each copy operation.