can someone test this for me

[very_unhappy]

Let's say I have a 2 windows systems server & client. I have two shared directories on server. They are both mounted on client as folder1 & folder2. Let's say I opened them both on client in GUI and drag and drop files from folder1 to folder2. Will the OS be smart enough to copy them localy on the server or will the files somehow go over the network to client and then copy back over.

Also if I make this drag and drop and let's say file is like 5 gig, can I just close the mouted folers' windows right away and the copy will complete localy on the server.

Also where will the actuall "i'm copying right now" little dialog window appear.

Pls, pls someone test this for me. One of my machines is down and the other one has ubuntu on it

[nihil]

Hmmmmm,

very_unhappy I am afraid I cannot really test that without more details of your exact setup.

It all depends on permissions and authorities? Remember the good old CRUD Matrix?...........create, read, update, delete....................

Now, I may have certain rights on the server, and different ones on my local machine. A classical example of that is a humble form or template. I can download it to my local machine and do what I like on there (that is what forms and templates are for?), but I cannot alter the original on the server.

Assuming that I am allowed to amend files on the server, logic would dictate that I lock the record, or even the whole folder, and make my amendments directly to the server.

The principle, is one of only making amendments to master records directly on the server, and having a tight record locking policy. If you don't do that, God help you in trying to establish an audit trail.

Where you generate records offline, they will exist only on your local machine until such time as you "send" or "save" them to the server. It will not happen automatically, and requires a conscious action on your part. Otherwise you are directly amending the server, and your maintenance program may or may not update a local copy depending entirely upon how it is written

You may have encountered a message something like "This record/folder is in use by XYZ, would you like to make a copy?" That warns you that someone might already be making amendments and what you see may not be what the data will be like when they have finished. If you then save your amendments back to the server, you will overwrite whatever they have done.

Hope that helps

[very_unhappy]

nihil ... both systems are under Admin account. full rights on both (how else would I mount the folder anyway)

good morning to you (here in NYC)

[nihil]

Hi, very_unhappy and a very good morning to you

If you have a simple database such as Access, or a spreadsheet, such as Excel, or a correspondence folder such as created in Word; and you download this file to a client, you now have two distinct copies

If you amend either copy, this will not be reflected in the other one until you save back to the server, or re-download to the client.

The same for Corel, Lotus Smartsuite, Sun Microsystems Open Office, Microsoft Office, Oracle or whatever. This is how they work "out of the box"

My question was do you have a more sophisticated system you have developed to handle multiple users, record locking, synchronisation and so on? Otherwise the two copies will be totally unaware of eachother until you decide to synchronise them manually.

Does that help?

Sorry if I confused you, but I have developed dozens of systems that handle a single inventory and distribution centre (center?) but have multiple order points. The idea in that scenario that all the order point locations have real time inventory records.

[very_unhappy]

i'm sure if you understand me correctly

i don't want to sync anything. the scenario is so simple you can find it on the back of the stamp (HAHA)

2 systems = both windows 2000, both log as admin, full rights

system 1 = two folders set on "shared"

system 2 = mounted folders on system 1 as local (but really remote)

my q. is: if i open the 2 folder on system 2 (they appear local but they are remote) and then DRAG AND DROP files from one folder to the other will the operating system be smart enough to make the copy localy on the system 1 or will the files somehow go to the system 2 and then back to system 1.

also where will the "coping" dialog box appears sys 1 or sys 2

BTW: the nature of the files doesn't matter they could be dvd rips or a whole website

they are just files

[nihil]

OK my friend, you are right, it is very simple.

The answer is NO , they will not be amended on the server system if you amend the client, or the other way round. The activity will NOT pass outside the local machine.

"Sharing" just means "sharing permissions ", it does not invoke a process , it just allows an activity if it is requested . Both machines remain totally independent of eachother until YOU decide otherwise, and instruct them accordingly.

The dialogue boxes for your file/folder maintenance will appear on the machine that you are working on. The other machine will be totally unaware of it All activity will happen locally on the machine you perform the action on (drag & drop for example).

Sorry, I was anticipating a much more complex scenario probably because those are generally what I work with.

[Und3ertak3r]

very_unhappy,

From my experience... it appears that the path of traffic during a copy between Client and server is Server_Folder1 - Client - Server_Folder2...

The progress bar is on the client PC..

/edit: Sorry Nihil.. Started my reply last night..left the PC on overnight.. and posted this morning...

as a disclaimer, I tested this on Win2k3 server to WinXp pro, this is the case with most windows OS I have worked with.. out of curiosity.. I will want to check XP to *Nix server (I assume same as Win-Win), So is *nix_Server to *nix_Client to *Nix_Server any smarter?

[sec_ware]

Hi

Originally posted here by Und3ertak3r
very_unhappy,

From my experience... it appears that the path of traffic during a copy between Client and server is Server_Folder1 - Client - Server_Folder2...

Correct The reason is the very workflow of copying. A copy command opens two file
handlers: source and destination. It reads from source into an allocatable memory, from
this memory it writes to the destination. The allocatable memory certainly is on client side!
The copy command does not explicitly know about the location of the source and destination
file - it is transparent to it, hence the above data stream.

I will want to check XP to *Nix server (I assume same as Win-Win), So is *nix_Server to *nix_Client to *Nix_Server any smarter?

I would bet that no, the standard copy command on *nix is not smarter. In order to
perform such an optimised copying, remote procedure calls would be necessary - certainly,
these are usually not used in cp, scp, .... Of course, there are ways to optimise copying
manually (execute the copy command on the server via ssh, pstools, etc.)

Cheers