Slow copying of files

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by =?Utf-8?B?SmFtZXMgUg==?=, Aug 2, 2007.

  1. We have a problem copying files from Windows Server 2003 64-bit to our local
    desktops running Windows XP. For a large number of the desktops, a file copy
    of 60 Mb from the server to the local drive can take about 30 minutes to
    complete. For other desktops of the same OS, the same file can be copied in
    about 5 seconds. For the ones the copy slowly, they can copy that same file
    from a Windows 2003 32-bit server or another desktop in 5 seconds. We have
    even moved PCs around to swap the network ports used and the problem follows
    the PC. We have standardized our desktop and server hardware so the problem
    should point to something in the software. There is something fouling up the
    communications between some of our Windows XPs and Windows 2003 64-bit and we
    are running out of ideas as to what to check. Any tips on what to look at?
     
    =?Utf-8?B?SmFtZXMgUg==?=, Aug 2, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hi,
    you could have a look for different tcp/ip settings on the x32 and x64
    server especially if NETBIOS over TCP/IP has the same settings (on) which
    helps generally for smb/cifs filesharing.
    second :
    you can have a look for differences on local security settings (dont know
    english label) -via : start -> managment -> local security police???
    or:
    if the servers work as domain controler "security police for domain
    controllers"

    in these settings look for "digital signing ????"

    regards jk
     
    Juergen Kluth, Aug 2, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. =?Utf-8?B?SmFtZXMgUg==?=

    jabloomf1230 Guest

    Have you tried robocopy? It comes with Vista, but can also be extracted
    from the Windows Resource Toolkit. There is also a freeware GUI for it:

    http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/RoboCopy-GUI-Download-35338.html

    robocopy is a MS product and the name stands for robust copy. There are
    no frills and it is lightening fast. Well, okay, maybe not THAT fast,
    but it is a lot faster than using the Windows explorer which is deathly
    slow for copying either large files or large numbers of files. I use it
    all the time on my Vista x64 system (so it must be x64 compatible)for
    copying folders of big AVI files around my network. There are also 3rd
    party programs that do the same thing.

    Windows Resource Toolkit download for Windows Server 2003:

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...69-57FF-4AE7-96EE-B18C4790CFFD&displaylang=en

    James R wrote:
    > We have a problem copying files from Windows Server 2003 64-bit to our local
    > desktops running Windows XP. For a large number of the desktops, a file copy
    > of 60 Mb from the server to the local drive can take about 30 minutes to
    > complete. For other desktops of the same OS, the same file can be copied in
    > about 5 seconds. For the ones the copy slowly, they can copy that same file
    > from a Windows 2003 32-bit server or another desktop in 5 seconds. We have
    > even moved PCs around to swap the network ports used and the problem follows
    > the PC. We have standardized our desktop and server hardware so the problem
    > should point to something in the software. There is something fouling up the
    > communications between some of our Windows XPs and Windows 2003 64-bit and we
    > are running out of ideas as to what to check. Any tips on what to look at?
     
    jabloomf1230, Aug 2, 2007
    #3
  4. =?Utf-8?B?SmFtZXMgUg==?=

    Tom Ferguson Guest

    This might contain something applicable:
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931770/

    Tom
    MSMVP
    Windows shell/User


    "James R" <James > wrote in message
    news:...
    > We have a problem copying files from Windows Server 2003 64-bit to our
    > local
    > desktops running Windows XP. For a large number of the desktops, a file
    > copy
    > of 60 Mb from the server to the local drive can take about 30 minutes
    > to
    > complete. For other desktops of the same OS, the same file can be
    > copied in
    > about 5 seconds. For the ones the copy slowly, they can copy that same
    > file
    > from a Windows 2003 32-bit server or another desktop in 5 seconds. We
    > have
    > even moved PCs around to swap the network ports used and the problem
    > follows
    > the PC. We have standardized our desktop and server hardware so the
    > problem
    > should point to something in the software. There is something fouling
    > up the
    > communications between some of our Windows XPs and Windows 2003 64-bit
    > and we
    > are running out of ideas as to what to check. Any tips on what to look
    > at?
     
    Tom Ferguson, Aug 3, 2007
    #4
  5. > This might contain something applicable:
    > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931770/


    Tom,

    While I agree that sometimes a KB article for an OS might apply to another
    (registry tweaks, etc), in this case, the article points you to a hotfix.
    Are you suggesting the original poster tries to install a Vista hotfix on
    XP/2003??
     
    Homer J. Simpson, Aug 3, 2007
    #5
  6. =?Utf-8?B?SmFtZXMgUg==?=

    Tom Ferguson Guest

    OK. You caught me. I was just skimming subject lines before moving on to
    other, pressing matters when I spotted this post. Since I recently had
    reason to apply the hotfix to several Vista boxes, I thought it worth
    pointing to it. In fairness, you must admit that I cautioned, "This might
    contain something applicable". Note the "might". Now that I did read the
    body of the post, I agree that there is no danger of relevance of that
    particular fix.

    As for, "install a Vista hotfix on XP/2003??" Aren't you a silly one!
    Ha!

    --------------
    You posted this 5/15/2007 in this forum:

    that'll make you feel superior to Microsoft by pointing out their
    stupidity.

    Personally, I'd just click the button and carry on with my life, but hey,
    it's a free world

    -------------

    Hmmmm. I think I'll take your good advice.


    Tom
    MSMVP
    Windows Shell/User



    "Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    news:...
    >> This might contain something applicable:
    >> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931770/

    >
    > Tom,
    >
    > While I agree that sometimes a KB article for an OS might apply to
    > another (registry tweaks, etc), in this case, the article points you to
    > a hotfix. Are you suggesting the original poster tries to install a
    > Vista hotfix on XP/2003??
    >
     
    Tom Ferguson, Aug 4, 2007
    #6
  7. > OK. You caught me. I was just skimming subject lines before moving on to
    > other, pressing matters when I spotted this post. Since I recently had
    > reason to apply the hotfix to several Vista boxes, I thought it worth
    > pointing to it. In fairness, you must admit that I cautioned, "This might
    > contain something applicable". Note the "might". Now that I did read the
    > body of the post, I agree that there is no danger of relevance of that
    > particular fix.
    >
    > As for, "install a Vista hotfix on XP/2003??" Aren't you a silly one! Ha!


    Just wanted to make sure you hadn't lost your sanity. :p
     
    Homer J. Simpson, Aug 4, 2007
    #7
  8. =?Utf-8?B?SmFtZXMgUg==?=

    Tom Ferguson Guest

    Oh, that ship sailed years ago!

    "Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    news:#...
    >> OK. You caught me. I was just skimming subject lines before moving on
    >> to other, pressing matters when I spotted this post. Since I recently
    >> had reason to apply the hotfix to several Vista boxes, I thought it
    >> worth pointing to it. In fairness, you must admit that I cautioned,
    >> "This might contain something applicable". Note the "might". Now that
    >> I did read the body of the post, I agree that there is no danger of
    >> relevance of that particular fix.
    >>
    >> As for, "install a Vista hotfix on XP/2003??" Aren't you a silly one!
    >> Ha!

    >
    > Just wanted to make sure you hadn't lost your sanity. :p
    >
    >
     
    Tom Ferguson, Aug 4, 2007
    #8
  9. =?Utf-8?B?SmFtZXMgUg==?=

    Guest

    On Aug 2, 4:27 pm, "Tom Ferguson" <> wrote:
    > This might contain something applicable:http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931770/
    >
    > Tom
    > MSMVP
    > Windows shell/User
    >
    > "James R" <James > wrote in messagenews:...
    >
    > > We have a problem copying files from Windows Server 2003 64-bit to our
    > > local
    > > desktops running Windows XP. For a large number of the desktops, a file
    > > copy
    > > of 60 Mb from the server to the local drive can take about 30 minutes
    > > to
    > > complete. For other desktops of the same OS, the same file can be
    > > copied in
    > > about 5 seconds. For the ones the copy slowly, they can copy that same
    > > file
    > > from a Windows 2003 32-bit server or another desktop in 5 seconds. We
    > > have
    > > even moved PCs around to swap the network ports used and the problem
    > > follows
    > > the PC. We have standardized our desktop and server hardware so the
    > > problem
    > > should point to something in the software. There is something fouling
    > > up the
    > > communications between some of our Windows XPs and Windows 2003 64-bit
    > > and we
    > > are running out of ideas as to what to check. Any tips on what to look
    > > at?


    Funny thing is I used to get the "0 minutes remaining" when FTPing to
    my webhosting server. Not all the time. I haven't seen the problem in
    some time so I wonder if it was fixed in an update or service pack.
    This is on X64, and again, only seen on ftp. I never had a problem
    transferring files on my local network.

    Not to drift off the topic too much, but I did encounter a slow down
    when transferring directories (folders) containing a large number of
    files, maybe 80k of files in some directories. This was from a X64
    machine to a win2kpro machine. What I noticed is the file transfers
    would slow down after a while, as if the mere fact of creating file
    name on the win2kpro machine caused the slowdown. I had about 50Gbyte
    to transfer, and it was never finishing. The slow down started at
    about 5gBytes of transfer.

    As an experiment, I zipped all the files I wanted to transfer.
    Transferring the zip file ran about as expected, i.e no slow down.
    However, as the files were unzipped on the win2kpro machine, the
    extraction slowed down.

    I pulled the hard drive from the win2kpro machine, hooked it up to the
    X64 machine, with the notion of running the windows exploring to do
    the copying. It turns out NTFS on win2k is not the same as NTFS on
    X64, making program not work.

    The ultimate solution was to use Partition Commander from the boot
    CDROM. It transfered the files without a hitch, even though the NTFS
    was not the same.
     
    , Aug 4, 2007
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ronnie Davis

    Slow copying of files from CDR ...

    Ronnie Davis, Nov 30, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    532
    Ronnie Davis
    Nov 30, 2004
  2. Marian Pudek

    Vista deleting, copying files very slow!!

    Marian Pudek, Jul 6, 2007, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    988
    HO Soi Fong
    Sep 6, 2007
  3. Expert lino fitter

    Re: slow slow slow!

    Expert lino fitter, Dec 10, 2008, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    707
    Expert lino fitter
    Dec 10, 2008
  4. Expert lino fitter

    Re: slow slow slow!

    Expert lino fitter, Dec 10, 2008, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    712
    Expert lino fitter
    Dec 12, 2008
  5. vijreddy

    slow copying of video files from dvd

    vijreddy, Jan 12, 2009, in forum: General Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,200
    technoplume
    Jan 12, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page