Local comparison with MD5

[fscussel]

I would like to use MD5 to compare 2 directories so that to avoid the binary comparison which takes much more resources. I only rely in binary comparison and/or MD5 to this job. MD5 is possible for remote, but is it possible for local?

[superflexible]

No. Windows does not provide MD5s.

MD5 generation would mean reading the whole file and calculating the MD5 value. So you can equally well simply compare every Byte against the original.

[fscussel]

Understood.

I have a suggestion.

That the "how to compare" be more configurable, with these options:

Size
Date
Atributes


Also, those 3 values should be checkboxes and also the user could move them up or down as to select which is more important, etc

[superflexible]

Interesting idea but that would not be withing the specs of the software. It will either consider a file identical or not.

[fscussel]

Interesting idea but that would not be withing the specs of the software. It will either consider a file identical or not.

?? Yes but my suggesiton is mean exactly to that, so the user can configure WHAT he considers to be "identical or not".

For ex: User want to consider identical if file is:

X Same size
X Same date
0 Same atributes

so files will not be copied if they are the same size and the same date, attributes would not matter. Also the program would first check for "same size" because user set the 3 options with Same size in top.

Another:

X Same date
0 Same size
0 Same atributtes

this time just the files being the same date/time would make the program consider them the same, so no further action would be taken. Other files with different date, even if with the same size and attributes would be copied.


I would say that this suggestion is a must, not a suggestion =) and I would thank if you provided it.

[superflexible]

The options really needed for syncing are all there, and have been for ten years. They have been able to fulfill the needs of a huge number of customers.

Most of what you suggest is there, except in a different form.

However, files with different sizes cannot be considered identical, because they are not. I am not going to add something like that. Files with obviously different content are different, period.

However in a two-way sync, you can choose what should happen when files have the same timestamp but a different size. You can then choose to ignore it. But not in one-way syncs.

[fscussel]

Ok so help find a solution for this:

file A:

Date: 01/01/2001
Size: 165 bytes

File B:

Date: 01/01/2012
Size: 165 bytes


How to configure so it replaces file B even IF the content is the same?

[superflexible]

Use Exact Mirror mode. This will overwrite "newer" files with older ones. Prerequisite is that you are doing a one-way sync.

The content does not have to be compared.

[fscussel]

that´s what I mean, most users wouldn´t understand that they should choose exact mirror. And also if I´m not mistaken that mode would replace everything, which is not my goal. The way I said would be more intuitive. Not that I´m saying there´s something wrong with the software, on the contrary, it´s superb, but that change would make it more intuitive and more flexible.

I would also ask if there´s an option to create a folder with the date to place the files into, like keeping one folder for each daily backup automatically?

[superflexible]

Hello,
yes can either choose "On the Right Side, Create a new folder each time" on the Folders tab sheet,
or use variables in the path, for example:

D:\Data\$YEAR$MONTHNUM$DAYOFMONTH

or even
D:\Data\$WEEKDAY
This second one will use a separate folder for each day of the week and re-use last week's folder.

See also
http://www.syncovery.com/variables/