Why is the Finder so BAD in copying files....

Question

Level 2

370 points

Why is the Finder so BAD in copying files....

Hi,

I regularly manage a fairly large network... With 5 users and a total of 25 hard drives... This is proving to be a real pain in the neck.

OS X - the self proclaimed "Most Advanced Operative System On The Planet" cant handle the load... Or better yet - it's Finder (The main files manager in OS X) cant cope with the situation...

This is what I am experiencing EVERY time when copying large sessions of files back and forth...

1) Finder could NOT complete operation as some files could NOT be read/written....

Then I locate the file which the finder supposedly had a problem with and copy only THAT particular file... And guess what - Perfectly OK...

The problem with this scenario is that if it happens when copying a chunk of 100GB and the problem occur at GB 40 - then the finder cancels the WHOLE process. And one can start ALL OVER - or manually go and check where the finder BLEW IT.... This is - 100% AMATEUR NIGHT.

2) OS X and it's permission confusion.

It seems that OS X gets confused - A WHOLE LOT - about it's permissions.... I repair those EVERY DAY.

Anyway - One example: copying a 4 folder separately from a network user to the back up drive. (All four folders have SAME permissions and so does it's contents.) This happens - folder two forces the Finder to render an alert that it could not copy as the I did not have the right file permissions... And for those scanning thru' this post vastly - They ALL had SAME permission SET.

This is hilarious....

Anyway - I also manage a larger PC network at my girlfriends Advertising Agency - here we're talking 'bout a network 10 times bigger than the one I am having trouble with... Guess what - NO PROBLEMS

What is with Mac and networking that JUST DONT WORK?

They have set up networking under OS X to LOOK very easy - but it is 95% NOT RELIABLE. OS X or the Finder doesn't correctly update the active network servers in the "browse network" in the finder window... And accidentally clicking on one that is no longer there makes the finder freeze for at least ten minutes before finally getting it's act together and reports: The server could not be found. This is ridiculous.

If anyone has any tips to what I could do to make the finder do what it's supposed to - please dont hesitate to write...

I dont need :

1) Standard Q's to whether I have set the permissions right or repaired those - I know how to set permissions
2) I know how to initialize a Hard drive - so I dont need those standard copy and paste guys pasting this post full of what I already know---

I dont mean to sound harsh but very HARD to get qualified answers here that are about NOVICE.... So please be so nice and gentle to NOT reply to this post with novice answers....

Thanks -

G5 Dual 2.3 GHZ, Mac OS X (10.4.9), PT HD3 / 4x ApoGee Rosetta 800 / 8GB RAM / 1TB HD

Posted on Aug 16, 2007 7:30 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Aug 16, 2007 7:56 AM in response to SteveDjokes

Are your users on a peer to peer network, or are you running a network server? Having administered both Windows and Mac OS networks myself, both small and large, I would suggest that comparing a Mac OS peer-to-peer with a Windows served network is not exactly fair.

You would need to compare either both peer-to-peer, or bother served via Windows Server vs Mac OS X Server.

It sounds to me like your Mac network is peer-to-peer, and I have to tell you, a peer-to-peer Windows environment is no walk in the park! Mac OS (IMHO) peers far better than Windows peers.

But if you want to run a real network, then you need a network server. Mac OS X Server will certainly alleviate your issues. Mac OS X Server running on an XServe will simply make your problems disappear. 8-)

Reply

Answer 2

scb

Level 5

5,388 points

Aug 16, 2007 7:55 AM in response to SteveDjokes

You're not a very endearing person, are you? LOL.

Do you even know what "repairing permissions" actually repairs? I can tell you that it will have nothing to do with your little folders, or files you create.It only affects items for which you have receipts.

Reply

Answer 3

SteveDjokes Author

Level 2

370 points

Aug 16, 2007 7:57 AM in response to psalmsmith

I use a G4 with a normal OS X to manage the file sharing and BackUp... This should "according to Apple" be sufficient

Steve

Reply

Answer 4

Aug 16, 2007 8:05 AM in response to SteveDjokes

what you can do as a workaround until you convince the pencil pushers to fund you a real network server, is make each workstation responsible for their own backups, i.e. run each backup as a shellscript and set up to invoke nightly via chrontabs to a networked drive somewhere on the peer network.

You will find that on a peer to peer network, a workstation copying it's own files out to a drive on another workstation has a lot fewer issues than trying to do the third party "I'm on workstation C, asking A to copy to B" bit.

Reply

Answer 5

SteveDjokes Author

Level 2

370 points

Aug 16, 2007 8:06 AM in response to scb

Well my dear better knowing friend... I know that - and that IS exactly WHY I asked people NOT to tell me to repair the DPs..... Cuz this is what most people do when they have problems thus that is what they suggest.....

So - I have to decline on your sarcasm and leave you starring at the wall:-)=

Reply

Answer 6

Aug 16, 2007 8:14 AM in response to SteveDjokes

(Thanks for the star, btw! 8-)

It is sufficient for basic home stuff. Non-server OS X is really designed for home users with 2 to 4 workstations sharing movies and pictures between themselves.

If you are familiar enough with the Unix commandline and writing shellscripts, you can set up chronjobs to automate your backups within each workstation individually to workaround this limitation.

For instance, it should not take 45 minutes for each workstation right? So make a shellscript on each workstation that simply copies the folder(s) to backup over to the target. The on workstation 1, set a chrontab to invoke the backup at 9 PM; on worstation 2, set a chrontab to invoke the backup at 9:45 PM; on workstation 3, set a chrontab to invoke the backup at 10:30 PM, on workstation 4 set a chrontab to invoke the backup at 11:15 PM and on workstation 5 set a chrontab to invoke the backup at midnight.

That way each workstation individually will command it's own backup. To make this even more flawless, make the "backup" shellscript owned by SU, and SUDO the actual script, which will make any permissions irrelevant.

Reply

Answer 7

Aug 16, 2007 8:58 AM in response to psalmsmith

Uhh, I promise that I'm not trying to be pedantic here, but even top-shelf Windows and Mac experts sometimes get intimidated by the Unix commandline. If you need more detail on how to make this happen then let me know and I'll be more than happy to break out with the dirty details.

Reply

Answer 8

BDAqua

Level 10

250,253 points

Aug 16, 2007 11:02 AM in response to SteveDjokes

I am a Novice, but I think relying on any OS for what the OS can do is not as great as 3rd party APPs that excel.

I use Tri-Backup...
http://www.tri-edre.com/english/index.html

I backup/copy/restore/syncronize/evolute/compare every computer on my Network from one Machine. I can back up cumputers B, C, D, E, F, G from A, or I can do B, D, E, F, G from C to A, or any other combo.

I can have it trigger any of it's functions when a Server or Client shows up on the Network, or I can schedule it, or do it immediately.

Another big advantage that should it get errors... it doesn't quit copying, and provides a list afterwards to easily fix or check out the problem.

And though it isn't Universal yet, it's faster on a G4 than any other method I've tried, as much as 3 times faster.

Reply

Answer 9

BDAqua

Level 10

250,253 points

Aug 16, 2007 11:01 PM in response to BDAqua

I'd like to add, that Windows® XP comes with "Paint"... shall I complain that it doesn't really do what Photoshop can do, or should I do/use what does the job in question the very best?

From the outset, your post seems a bit stuffy, perhaps justifiably so, can't tell from here. 🙂

Me, I only have a 6th Grade education, (can't prove it though!), anything I know here has been learned by Helping others here.

Reply

Answer 10

Aug 17, 2007 5:59 AM in response to SteveDjokes

This large network of 5 users and 25 hard Drives....(not the massive one at your girlfriend's)
Are these blocks of 100GB file transfers being attempted over ethernet cable, or wirelss connections?

Reply

Answer 11

Aug 18, 2007 7:23 AM in response to SteveDjokes

I understand the problem. Here are some ideas:

1) Permission repair only affects files in the system, userfiles are ignored.

2) For large file transfer, you must be hardwired. Wi-Fi is insufficient for transferring large files.

3) When copying Mac files to a Windows filesystem, illegal characters in a filename will cause the operation to stop without any informational error message. In any case, copying large files to a Windows machine is not very reliable. I recommend Mac-formatted network storage.

4) When attempting to mount a nonexistent network disk, Finder stalls with a 5 minute timeout. The solution is to add a "Quit Finder" menu item to the Finder icon in the Dock.

5) If the machine uses a dynamic localnet address, Finder is unable to locate an aliased network disk that has changed. You need to mount the disk with the "Connect to Server" dialog first to fix the aliase(s). A DNS setup may help to locate machines by hostname rather than IP address.

6) Switches are problematic. If you are using switches rather than routers you may be seeing congestion on machines connected to the switch.

7) I highly recommend rsync triggered by a cronjob running in the wee hours of the morning. rsync is robust and persistent in file copying.

Reply

Answer 12

Aug 18, 2007 7:38 AM in response to SteveDjokes

You could really help out by describing your network a little more. 5 users and 25 HD's could mean a lot of things.
I run a primarily Mac network, and it, well, works. So the real question, is how have you possibly mis-configured the network, or is there a hardware issue (the wrong hardware for the job or hardware that is broken). You're leaving us to guess a lot about your setup.

You might want to limit the bashing of Apple when asking for help on a forum with a lot of Mac fans.

Reply

Answer 13

Aug 18, 2007 8:01 AM in response to Jeff Kelleher

Well put.
We need more information from the original poster, and a little lighter attitude.

We'd love to help.

Reply