Copy with verify per block

Previously R.Wieser wrote:

Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws
ws.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

R.Wieser wrote in l.nl
Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws ws.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

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

Eric Gisin wrote in
"Alvin Andries" wrote in message ...
"Arno Wagner" wrote in message ...

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.

Previously ByPass 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
"Alvin Andries" wrote in message ...
"Arno Wagner" wrote in message ...

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.

Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws
ws.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
Previously Alvin Andries
wrote:
"Arno Wagner" wrote in message
...
Previously Alvin Andries
wrote:
"Richard Foersom" wrote in
message ...
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

Previously R.Wieser wrote:
Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws
ws.net...
[...]
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* ?

I guess Folkert still has faint hopes that I actually attribute any
kind of importance to him. So inventing a new personality to answer to
his portings would just be the thing for him. Unfortunately I am quite
content to post under my own name.

Arno

Arno Wagner schreef in berichtnieuws
...

Previously R.Wieser wrote:
Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws
ws.net...
[...]
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* ?

I guess Folkert still has faint hopes that I actually attribute any
kind of importance to him. So inventing a new personality to
answer to his portings would just be the thing for him.
Unfortunately I am quite content to post under my own name.

Its also much easier for a person to believe that just *one* person is not
content with his/her behaviour (easier to ignore as a fluke or "a single
a**hole attacking me" incident) than to realize that there are more than one
person with the same discontent.

Such a situation would mostly mean that the one person *has* to look at his
own behaviour too (herd behaviour : make sure you're acting pretty-much the
same as the rest), and thats dangerous ...

Regards,
R.Wieser

Previously R.Wieser wrote:
Arno Wagner schreef in berichtnieuws
...

Previously R.Wieser wrote:
Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws
ws.net...
[...]
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* ?

I guess Folkert still has faint hopes that I actually attribute any
kind of importance to him. So inventing a new personality to
answer to his portings would just be the thing for him.
Unfortunately I am quite content to post under my own name.

Its also much easier for a person to believe that just *one* person
is not content with his/her behaviour (easier to ignore as a fluke
or "a single a**hole attacking me" incident) than to realize that
there are more than one person with the same discontent.

Indeed.

Such a situation would mostly mean that the one person *has* to look
at his own behaviour too (herd behaviour : make sure you're acting
pretty-much the same as the rest), and thats dangerous ...

Hehe.

Arno

Arno Wagner schreef in bericht
Previously R.Wieser wrote:

Folkert Rienstra schreef in berichtnieuws
ws.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.

Stupid dutch *******. All dutch are bastarts.
Arno, could you please show us what post he stole your word bablebot
from? i can't seem to find it.

The closest thing i could find was this:
reenews.net
http://groups.google.com/group/comp....197c317dd26c00


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.

Yes, Arno, you are quit right.
That's something he obviously stole from you too, the rat bastart.
So very uncreative.


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

Good for you, Arno.


Arno

Rudi W. schreef in berichtnieuws
...

Rofl !! Someone (lets guess who ...) seems to be doing an half-assed
attempt to imitate *me*.

Someone once said that (trying) to imitate someone, even when negative, is
the most sincere form of flattery. As such I thank you, you've made my
day. :-)