F5F Stay Refreshed Software Operating Systems Adjust your Windows file transfer options through the settings menu.

Adjust your Windows file transfer options through the settings menu.

Adjust your Windows file transfer options through the settings menu.

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next
C
CanaryRampage
Member
61
02-01-2016, 04:53 PM
#1
Yes, you can adjust how Windows handles file transfers. By default, transfers run in parallel, but you can change this setting to process files sequentially, queuing them one after another. This allows independent moves without simultaneous starts.
C
CanaryRampage
02-01-2016, 04:53 PM #1

Yes, you can adjust how Windows handles file transfers. By default, transfers run in parallel, but you can change this setting to process files sequentially, queuing them one after another. This allows independent moves without simultaneous starts.

D
drako_sky
Member
166
02-01-2016, 06:36 PM
#2
I’m not familiar with this function, but it’s good to know you can pause and resume transfers.
D
drako_sky
02-01-2016, 06:36 PM #2

I’m not familiar with this function, but it’s good to know you can pause and resume transfers.

J
Judepude
Junior Member
41
02-02-2016, 01:29 AM
#3
You can simply retrieve additional cache. The subject is unclear. @DeadEyePsycho or @M.Yurizaki could have the information.
J
Judepude
02-02-2016, 01:29 AM #3

You can simply retrieve additional cache. The subject is unclear. @DeadEyePsycho or @M.Yurizaki could have the information.

C
coolegiraffe16
Junior Member
16
02-02-2016, 02:15 AM
#4
I hadn't realized there was any way before, but it's something that has always bothered me. It seems so much quicker when one transfer completes without issues, and it reduces the chances of problems occurring (for example, if a crash happens while moving 12 files, all transfers would need to be re-run and the original data could be at risk, whereas transferring one at a time keeps the risk limited to just one file).
C
coolegiraffe16
02-02-2016, 02:15 AM #4

I hadn't realized there was any way before, but it's something that has always bothered me. It seems so much quicker when one transfer completes without issues, and it reduces the chances of problems occurring (for example, if a crash happens while moving 12 files, all transfers would need to be re-run and the original data could be at risk, whereas transferring one at a time keeps the risk limited to just one file).

Z
Zercuador
Member
163
02-05-2016, 01:28 PM
#5
You can combine commands easily in the terminal.
Z
Zercuador
02-05-2016, 01:28 PM #5

You can combine commands easily in the terminal.

S
sdmesser
Junior Member
2
02-06-2016, 10:14 PM
#6
Use robocopy to preserve the status of each transfer. If a failure occurs midway, it will resume from the last saved point.
S
sdmesser
02-06-2016, 10:14 PM #6

Use robocopy to preserve the status of each transfer. If a failure occurs midway, it will resume from the last saved point.

P
pookums4
Member
55
02-07-2016, 12:46 AM
#7
It seems TeraCopy allows you to schedule copy tasks. As a freemium product, access to this feature might vary.
P
pookums4
02-07-2016, 12:46 AM #7

It seems TeraCopy allows you to schedule copy tasks. As a freemium product, access to this feature might vary.

S
sniperboy650
Senior Member
735
02-12-2016, 09:22 PM
#8
I recall a study where researchers presented participants with progress bars of similar length that changed at different speeds, asking them to identify which felt most efficient. Bars that moved steadily or accelerated toward the end were perceived as faster, while those slowing down later seemed slower. The key takeaway is that perceived speed doesn't always match actual performance.

You bring up an important observation. While it makes sense to execute some transfers in parallel—like moving files between unrelated storage devices—certain operations should remain serialized to boost efficiency. For example, processing several files at once on the same HDDs can be more effective than doing them one after another. Doing them consecutively instead of in batches helps prevent turning sequential I/O into random I/O.
S
sniperboy650
02-12-2016, 09:22 PM #8

I recall a study where researchers presented participants with progress bars of similar length that changed at different speeds, asking them to identify which felt most efficient. Bars that moved steadily or accelerated toward the end were perceived as faster, while those slowing down later seemed slower. The key takeaway is that perceived speed doesn't always match actual performance.

You bring up an important observation. While it makes sense to execute some transfers in parallel—like moving files between unrelated storage devices—certain operations should remain serialized to boost efficiency. For example, processing several files at once on the same HDDs can be more effective than doing them one after another. Doing them consecutively instead of in batches helps prevent turning sequential I/O into random I/O.

E
EuropeanWolf
Junior Member
2
02-15-2016, 10:10 AM
#9
E
EuropeanWolf
02-15-2016, 10:10 AM #9

I
icefreezjr
Member
192
02-15-2016, 02:56 PM
#10
I'm almost certain that data transfer algorithms are smart enough to try to sort things out before doing the transfer. I've noticed a lot of times when I transfer files that will have conflicts, there's a period of time when nothing's happening until it asks me what I want to do with the conflicts, then it takes off from there. And depending on where the data lives, it may be faster to do operations in parallel because they can be queued up in such a way the drives effectively write sequentially.
I
icefreezjr
02-15-2016, 02:56 PM #10

I'm almost certain that data transfer algorithms are smart enough to try to sort things out before doing the transfer. I've noticed a lot of times when I transfer files that will have conflicts, there's a period of time when nothing's happening until it asks me what I want to do with the conflicts, then it takes off from there. And depending on where the data lives, it may be faster to do operations in parallel because they can be queued up in such a way the drives effectively write sequentially.

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next