Windows just lost a > 30GB file. Edit: Some files grew in size too!

[Ichinisan]

[edit 2013-01-07]

Well, it looks like the new 3TB drive is the culprit.

I'm out of storage and I needed to start using the 3TB drive, even though I don't trust it. I've wasted hours copying files and performing fc /b file comparisons. I still have over 1.5TB that I need to copy. Well, I was on third really-large file when the comparison encountered differences between the source and the destination. Deleted, copied again, performed comparison again and it passed.

This sucks.

I have the worst luck with hard drives. I buy a massive capacity drive for backup / archival and it just starts trashing files. Ugh! How can they actually sell products like this?

[previous OP]

Sucks.

I didn't have time to finish watching a particular BD movie rental a week ago, so I ripped it to watch later (getting into the gray area, I know). This produced an ISO file > 30GB in size. I tried to move the ISO from a network drive (Seagate GoFlex Home 2TB, connected through gigabit ethernet) to a new 3TB USB drive (Western Digital). I selected the source folder and chose "cut," then selected the destination drive and chose "paste."

For the first few minutes, it was copying at around 44MB/s. Then it slowed to about 22MB/s. When it reached the point where it should have finished, I got some kind of copy error with an option to "try again." The message kept reappearing instantly when I clicked "Try again." I clicked it about 3-4 times and then it didn't come back. I checked the source and the destination, looking for the ISO file. It simply doesn't exist.

#$%#!

I'm using Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit. There is clearly some problem with the file-move logic in Windows. This isn't supposed to happen. A moved file should not be deleted from the source directory until it is successfully moved to the destination. WTH, Microsoft? NOT COOL.

[edit]

Don't cut/paste on files that are important to you. Copy/paste, then delete the original on successful copy.

Tried it. Here's what happened:

I noticed that some folders had a slightly different file size. Narrowed it down to a couple of small files. The copy is larger than the source.

This sucks.

First pic is the source. Second pic is the copy. When I view the bad copy with Notepad++, it shows 32 normal characters followed by lots and lots of "nul" characters.

 

[Maximilian]

Not cool indeed

What movie was it?

Let's keep the screwball characters out of the post bodies
-ViRGE

 

[Ichinisan]

Not cool indeed ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็

What movie was it?

ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็ส็็็็็็็็็ ส็

Snow White and the Huntsman - Watched about halfway. Nothing more than a special effects movie (expected).

 

[lxskllr]

Don't cut/paste on files that are important to you. Copy/paste, then delete the original on successful copy.

 

[pmv]

Don't cut/paste on files that are important to you. Copy/paste, then delete the original on successful copy.

Learnt that the hard way many years ago, when the-usually-very-reliable NT completely corrupted, for no discernable reason, a huge file of important work-related emails that I was moving from one drive to another. I wanted to smash the machine with a hammer for that.

OP - at least it wasn't anything irreplaceable. Or even valuable. Can't you buy something like that on DVD from Amazon marketplace for a pittance? Isn't it the digital equivalent of dropping a dollar in the street?

 

[Ichinisan]

Don't cut/paste on files that are important to you. Copy/paste, then delete the original on successful copy.

I learned to do just the opposite. When a copy process with lots of folders, sub-folders, and files fails for any reason, you often can't determine where it stopped to avoid starting over completely. Even if you can, it becomes a manual process from there. Gets even worse after multiple failures.

...of course, that's another logical flaw with Windows. It should complete everything that it can copy and list the failures and prompts for you to acknowledge when you return.

 

[Ichinisan]

Learnt that the hard way many years ago, when the-usually-very-reliable NT completely corrupted, for no discernable reason, a huge file of important work-related emails that I was moving from one drive to another. I wanted to smash the machine with a hammer for that.

OP - at least it wasn't anything irreplaceable. Or even valuable. Can't you buy something like that on DVD from Amazon marketplace for a pittance? Isn't it the digital equivalent of dropping a dollar in the street?

Yeah. Just pissed off that my operating system failed at one of the most basic tasks (moving a file without losing it).

 

[Nothinman]

I would guess that something else failed, my first guess would be the GoFlex. Did you look in the eventlogs to see if Windows reported any more errors in there to give you a hint as to what happened?

I believe the copy process with Explorer in Win8 works like you want, but most people have been using tools like Robocopy for years now whenever we want large, reliable, restartable, etc copies in Windows.

 

[Ichinisan]

I would guess that something else failed, my first guess would be the GoFlex. Did you look in the eventlogs to see if Windows reported any more errors in there to give you a hint as to what happened?

I believe the copy process with Explorer in Win8 works like you want, but most people have been using tools like Robocopy for years now whenever we want large, reliable, restartable, etc copies in Windows.

The GoFlex network drive has all other files. Windows simply should not have sent any instruction to delete the source file if the move process failed during the copy operation.

 

[Ferzerp]

Yeah. Just pissed off that my operating system failed at one of the most basic tasks (moving a file without losing it).

Don't use a content editing application archetype for file transfers. I know it sounds like I'm shifting blame here, but there are a multitude of ways that you could have done this without causing a problem.

You chose the very one that would.

Think for a moment, about what a cut/paste is and how that behavior acts in *every* case. In a word processor, if you cut data, and then never paste it, do you still have it? How about in image manipulation? Sure, it may still be in a clipboard (but only while you don't overwrite it, or push it out in a myriad of other ways), but there is no spare 30GB clipboard to store your file.

Honestly, I don't agree with the inclusion of that archetype in to a file manager to begin with, but knowing it is there and I can't do anything about it, I just don't use it. The archetype suggests, delete, then create a new instance. File moves suggests copy, then delete the original. Explorer file cut/paste is like a bastard mix of both of these. Just use move, or copy.

 

[masteryoda34]

If I am moving a large file from one drive to another with Windows, my process is always 1) copy, 2) verify copied files, 3) delete old files.

I learned to do just the opposite. When a copy process with lots of folders, sub-folders, and files fails for any reason, you often can't determine where it stopped to avoid starting over completely. Even if you can, it becomes a manual process from there. Gets even worse after multiple failures.

Very true. In situations with lots of sub-folders and files where I think they are likely to be failures, I use robocopy on the command line. I will set it to skip failures and use /MIR so that I don't have to re-copy everything once I have gone back and addressed the reason for the failures.

 

[Nothinman]

The GoFlex network drive has all other files. Windows simply should not have sent any instruction to delete the source file if the move process failed during the copy operation.

I understand that, but there are reasons other than Windows deleting the file that could cause it to disappear.

 

[Elixer]

The 30GB file still should be there, as long as you didn't write anything else to said drive.
Then just use one of the many free apps that can restore deleted files.

I agree though, windows shouldn't erase a file that wasn't transferred correctly. It is a bug, not a feature.

 

[Ferzerp]

windows shouldn't erase a file that wasn't transferred correctly. It is a bug, not a feature.

What is the expected behavior in any application when you cut, but don't paste?

 

[ImDonly1]

I learned to do just the opposite. When a copy process with lots of folders, sub-folders, and files fails for any reason, you often can't determine where it stopped to avoid starting over completely. Even if you can, it becomes a manual process from there. Gets even worse after multiple failures.

If you copy and it fails, you just copy again. It will detect duplicates and asks if you want to replace or ignore. You can just ignore all and it skips them.

 

[Elixer]

What is the expected behavior in any application when you cut, but don't paste?

We are talking about files, not text. They are indeed different beasts, and are handled differently.
When you cut & paste a file, the *contents* of said file are not written to the clipboard, it is a file pointer that is copied into it.
Then the OS should be smart enough to detect errors, and not just assume the file move did occur, and yes, that is what it does, it moves said file, then it deletes said file from original source.

For applications, the actual text is in the clipboard, and you can do copy / move and even undo the cut as well.

A better way to deal with windows is install Teracopy. Then you will not have issues.

 

[pmv]

I learned to do just the opposite. When a copy process with lots of folders, sub-folders, and files fails for any reason, you often can't determine where it stopped to avoid starting over completely. Even if you can, it becomes a manual process from there. Gets even worse after multiple failures.

...of course, that's another logical flaw with Windows. It should complete everything that it can copy and list the failures and prompts for you to acknowledge when you return.

I agree entirely - but the stupid, stupid, way windows handles folder merging is the underlying problem there.

And that, apparently, is one thing that has finally been fixed in windows 8 (shame that to get that fix you have to lose aero and the start menu).

The way merging folders (whether its needed 'cos of a failed copy or some other reason) has been handled in windows has annoyed me since '95. I really do not understand why it took them till windows8 to notice that it needed fixing.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

This is why I never use Cut now. If Windows fails it, there's always the chance that it disappears into the ether.

I learned to do just the opposite. When a copy process with lots of folders, sub-folders, and files fails for any reason, you often can't determine where it stopped to avoid starting over completely. Even if you can, it becomes a manual process from there. Gets even worse after multiple failures.

...of course, that's another logical flaw with Windows. It should complete everything that it can copy and list the failures and prompts for you to acknowledge when you return.

That's still better than losing the files completely.

 

[Hugo Drax]

Sucks.

I didn't have time to finish watching a particular BD movie rental a week ago, so I ripped it to watch later (getting into the gray area, I know). This produced an ISO file > 30GB in size. I tried to move the ISO from a network drive (Seagate GoFlex Home 2TB, connected through gigabit ethernet) to a new 3TB USB drive (Western Digital). I selected the source folder and chose "cut," then selected the destination drive and chose "paste."

For the first few minutes, it was copying at around 44MB/s. Then it slowed to about 22MB/s. When it reached the point where it should have finished, I got some kind of copy error with an option to "try again." The message kept reappearing instantly when I clicked "Try again." I clicked it about 3-4 times and then it didn't come back. I checked the source and the destination, looking for the ISO file. It simply doesn't exist.

#$%#!

I'm using Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit. There is clearly some problem with the file-move logic in Windows. This isn't supposed to happen. A moved file should not be deleted from the source directory until it is successfully moved to the destination. WTH, Microsoft? NOT COOL.

Just go to time machine and go back one and your good to go.

 

[Ichinisan]

If you copy and it fails, you just copy again. It will detect duplicates and asks if you want to replace or ignore. You can just ignore all and it skips them.

In practice, this does not work. You leave it and come back to find yet another prompt, holding-up the copy process. Even if you chose "do this for all," it will have another type of prompt. Sometimes, when you select several files and try to transfer again, they will copy in a different order and you won't receive your merge / overwrite / copy anyway / skip existing prompt until much later, and it stops the transfer that you wanted to leave running.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

In practice, this does not work. You leave it and come back to find yet another prompt, holding-up the copy process. Even if you chose "do this for all," it will have another type of prompt. Sometimes, when you select several files and try to transfer again, they will copy in a different order and you won't receive your merge / overwrite / copy anyway / skip existing prompt until much later, and it stops the transfer that you wanted to leave running.

I reiterate. It's still better than losing the files completely. And, in your case, not even knowing which files have been lost.

 

[Nothinman]

In practice, this does not work. You leave it and come back to find yet another prompt, holding-up the copy process. Even if you chose "do this for all," it will have another type of prompt. Sometimes, when you select several files and try to transfer again, they will copy in a different order and you won't receive your merge / overwrite / copy anyway / skip existing prompt until much later, and it stops the transfer that you wanted to leave running.

Which is why there are so many copy/sync tools available. Explorer was designed as an interactive tool, not an automated one.

 

[Ferzerp]

In practice, this does not work. You leave it and come back to find yet another prompt, holding-up the copy process. Even if you chose "do this for all," it will have another type of prompt. Sometimes, when you select several files and try to transfer again, they will copy in a different order and you won't receive your merge / overwrite / copy anyway / skip existing prompt until much later, and it stops the transfer that you wanted to leave running.

So just use the command line and set the flags to make it default to whatever behavior you want... You can copy, move, robocopy, whatever you want.

There are plenty of ways to do this built in, you are just choosing the absolute worst way of doing it, ignoring all the others, and then complaining.

 

[bigrash]

Don't cut/paste on files that are important to you. Copy/paste, then delete the original on successful copy.

Yup, that's what I always do.

 

[pmv]

nm