• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

I hate windows networking.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: WannaFly
I'd bet on the fact that it wasnt windows networking's fault, you were probably MOVING the file instead of COPYING. That will do that to the file. You've learned your lesson!
Click to expand...

Matters not. If he were to move the file instead of copy the file, it would not have removed/truncated the original unless the move was successful.

The idea that the source file was somehow truncated is technically absurd; in other words, it just doesn't make any sense. Can you tell us what kind of a file this was?
 
Originally posted by: GeekDrew
Originally posted by: notfred
I had this 4GB file on a Windows 2000 machine. I had an OS X machine on the same network. I connected to the macintosh share from the windows machine. I then copied the file from a Windows Exploer window, and pasted it into the open window showing the macintosh share. The file transfer started. About 75% of the way through the transfer, the "cable disconnected" message appeared. At that point the transfer stopped, and the file size was now 10MB on the windows machine, where it had resided the entire time. Is that a detailed enough description?
Click to expand...

Yes. Sorry for trying to figure out what happened.

And what did happen was probably that windows didn't know that the file transfer failed - I'm not 100% sure on how it works, but it most likely does not verify that the file transfer was successful under foreign operating systems. And yes, while SMB should have governed it (I believe), there was a failure somewhere. Most likely a hardware fault.

Drew
Click to expand...

It should know it failed. Think about TCP for a couple of minutes, you'll figure it out. 🙂
 
Windows does wierd things sometimes. 4gB is right at the limit for NTFS isn't it? Maybe a driver hiccup affected more than it should have.
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It should know it failed. Think about TCP for a couple of minutes, you'll figure it out. 🙂
Click to expand...
Yeah I know that it SHOULD know that it has failed... but apparently something went wrong somewhere.
 
Originally posted by: GeekDrew
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It should know it failed. Think about TCP for a couple of minutes, you'll figure it out. 🙂
Click to expand...
Yeah I know that it SHOULD know that it has failed... but apparently something went wrong somewhere.
Click to expand...

But it can't be the fault of Windows... Noooooooooooooo.

This is what I was specifically referring to:
I'm not 100% sure on how it works, but it most likely does not verify that the file transfer was successful under foreign operating systems.
Click to expand...

The OS should have nothing to do with it. The fact that it is TCP is what should have solved everything, or atleast SMB should be smart enough to use TCP and not mess with the file if a problem is detected. If Microsoft happened to use open standards for networking type stuff, this wouldn't be a problem. And maybe this is a bug in Window's TCP/IP stack.
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Windows does wierd things sometimes. 4gB is right at the limit for NTFS isn't it? Maybe a driver hiccup affected more than it should have.
Click to expand...

I thought 4 gig was the limit for fat32
 
Originally posted by: Descartes
Originally posted by: WannaFly
I'd bet on the fact that it wasnt windows networking's fault, you were probably MOVING the file instead of COPYING. That will do that to the file. You've learned your lesson!
Click to expand...

Matters not. If he were to move the file instead of copy the file, it would not have removed/truncated the original unless the move was successful.

The idea that the source file was somehow truncated is technically absurd; in other words, it just doesn't make any sense. Can you tell us what kind of a file this was?
Click to expand...

It was a DVD image in ISO format.
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: MeanMeosh
... that's why you copy and paste, not cut and paste on a network...
Click to expand...

Read the original post. Plus, this would not have affected anything.
Click to expand...

i know... i just edited my post... my bad.


i've had this happen to me before, and they've always been with mega huge files (3+ gigs) the wierd thing was... i found the entire file in a totally unrelated directory a couple of weeks later :Q
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
The OS should have nothing to do with it. The fact that it is TCP is what should have solved everything, or atleast SMB should be smart enough to use TCP and not mess with the file if a problem is detected. If Microsoft happened to use open standards for networking type stuff, this wouldn't be a problem. And maybe this is a bug in Window's TCP/IP stack.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was in agreement with you the whole time... I must have just been saying it wrong. Yeah, come to think of it, I am contradicting what I said earlier. I don't know what I was thinking last night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top