Topic "synchronising a folders with date filter"

Author Message
solofr
[View user's profile]

Joined: 2008-01-29
Posts: 2
Location: France
Hello,

I'm using winscp with de command line.
Is it possible to synchronise folders with a filter by date?
I would like to synchronise some folders beetween now and 2 months earliers.

I hope to be clear.

Best Regards

Solo

PS: I'm using the 4.0.4 version of winscp
Advertisements
martin
[View user's profile]
Site Admin
Joined: 2002-12-10
Posts: 24553
Location: Prague, Czechia
No, it is not clear, sorry Sad Please try again.
_________________
Martin Prikryl
solofr
[View user's profile]

Joined: 2008-01-29
Posts: 2
Location: France
Ok, this is that I want to do.

I have a folder who contain more than 2500 folders
to synchronise.
The date of these subfolders start at 29 October 2007
and end at today.
I would to synchronise only the subfolders between
the 30 november 2007 to today and not the old one.

Is it possible?

Best regards

Solo
martin
[View user's profile]
Site Admin
Joined: 2002-12-10
Posts: 24553
Location: Prague, Czechia
No. You can filter them by name only.
_________________
Martin Prikryl
todutta

Guest


Hi,

i have 100 file generating in an Archive direcotry in a DAY. based on the present date i need to move the files using FTP to other server in a hourly schedule job.

Please suggest me to set the date filter to transfer the files.

Thanks,
Ravi.
drmrbrewer
[View user's profile]

Joined: 2008-07-19
Posts: 23
Location: UK
I'd also find it quite useful to have a "filter by date" feature, not just "filter by name". If I have a big sync job and *know* that the only changes are quite recent (e.g. in the last day) then I could run the sync job really quickly by telling WinSCP to ignore any files older than a day -- I'm not interested in WindSCP spending hours checking on the sync status of older files because I *know* they do not need uploading.

Having said this, with another ftp tool I have been using up till now (before I discovered WinSCP) this was quite an important feature request for me, but with WinSCP's excellent keepuptodate script command I can have a watch running in the background all the time, and hopefully I will rarely need to run an actual sync to upload new files to my server, because they will have been transferred in the background as they appear! It's only when something goes wrong (e.g. the WinSCP background keepuptodate process died for some reason and the changes weren't noticed) that I would need to run the sync job -- and it would be ideal then to tell WinSCP to skip over files older than a certain age to speed it up.

Mike
martin
[View user's profile]
Site Admin
Joined: 2002-12-10
Posts: 24553
Location: Prague, Czechia
drmrbrewer wrote:
I'd also find it quite useful to have a "filter by date" feature, not just "filter by name". If I have a big sync job and *know* that the only changes are quite recent (e.g. in the last day) then I could run the sync job really quickly by telling WinSCP to ignore any files older than a day -- I'm not interested in WindSCP spending hours checking on the sync status of older files because I *know* they do not need uploading.

Sorry I do not understand how this can quicken the synchronization. WinSCP would still need to compare the time of the file, not against time of the target file, but against the filter time. This would take the same time.
_________________
Martin Prikryl
drmrbrewer
[View user's profile]

Joined: 2008-07-19
Posts: 23
Location: UK
Surely it takes longer to query the mod time of a *remote* file than to query the mod time of a *local* file? With the former you have to communicate with the remote server, whereas with the former you only have a local OS call to make... I'm no expert but that MUST be quicker? I've been using another ftp program that does run through to compare each and every file against its remote counterpart, and it takes forever.

Mike
martin
[View user's profile]
Site Admin
Joined: 2002-12-10
Posts: 24553
Location: Prague, Czechia
drmrbrewer wrote:
Surely it takes longer to query the mod time of a *remote* file than to query the mod time of a *local* file? With the former you have to communicate with the remote server, whereas with the former you only have a local OS call to make... I'm no expert but that MUST be quicker?

That's true. Yet you still have to query for content of the remote directory to check if it contains files/folders not present in local directory. Or if the timestamps of existing remote files are the same as timestamps local files which are newer then the filter.
_________________
Martin Prikryl
drmrbrewer
[View user's profile]

Joined: 2008-07-19
Posts: 23
Location: UK
What I'm thinking of is the "synchronize remote" command: so it's only changes to local files that are sent to the remote server. So, no need to query remote server to check for files/folders not present in local folder. And if you can skip quickly over 99% of the local files without making *any* query to remote server (because 99% of local files fall outside the date filter range), then that's a big time saving. Don't you also get a similar time saving when using the filename filter with "synchronize remote"; all I'm suggesting is to do filtering based on timestamps as well as on filenames.

Cheers,

Mike
Advertisements

You can post new topics in this forum






Search Site

What is WinSCP?

It is award-winning SFTP client, SCP client, FTPS client and FTP client integrated into one software program for file transfer to FTP server or secure SFTP server. [More]

And it's free!

Donate

About donations

$9   $19   $49   $99

About donations

Recommend

WinSCP Privacy Policy

WinSCP License