locked
SyncToy - collision detection? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi all,

    I'm currently evaluating SyncToy 2.0.
    I would like to synchronize directories on a W2k3 DFS share with local ones just like with the offline folder functionality that is built in Win7, Vista, etc. but more transparent and reliable.
    People are changing documents when being online and offline so the tool needs to detect collisions where a document has been changed in more than one place. In this case the user needs to decide what to do rather then the tool overwriting one of the less recent copies.

    This seems to be not the case in SyncToy 2.0 x64 (Version 2.0.100.0, built on 2008-08-12) on Windows 7 x64 RTM.
    So finally here comes the question:
    Is there somethin wrong with my installation or is this behavior by design and if so are there plans to change this behavior?

    Thanks in advance
      Klaus

    Tuesday, August 25, 2009 3:00 PM

Answers

  • HI Klaus -

    You are correct - we do have knowledge about the previous sync and we are storing information. SyncToy uses the FileSyncProvider from the Microsoft Sync Framework. The framework definitely supports the ability to bubble up to the user collisions and ask the user for clarification on which update to pick - unfortunately the File Sync Provider takes the path of deciding this for itself. So using SyncToy/FileSyncProvider - there is no way for you do this currently and we are not going to have this in the next version either. It is something we have considered doing but have not had time to implement yet so we will look into it for a future release.

    Thanks
    Deepa
    Deepa ( Microsoft Sync Framework)
    Wednesday, September 2, 2009 6:56 PM

All replies

  • I did not very clearly understand your question, but for synctoy, when there is update-update conflict, synctoy 's action should be like this:
    Action option,
    Synchronize, the last modification will overwrite another side;
    Contribute, if the left side is the last modification, the right side files will be overwriten, or there is no action;
    Echo, if the left side is the last modification, the right side files will be overwriten, or there is no action;


    Thanks,
    Ping
    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    Wednesday, September 2, 2009 6:19 AM
  • Hi Ping,

    I’m interested to replace Windows own offline folder synchronisation by SyncToy. This is because I want to know what has been synchronized and what not, I want to have more control over the whole process. But I need the same functionality for collision detection.

    This means modified, deleted, renamed files should be synchronized but files that have been modified on both sides since the last sync must not be overwritten. In case of such a collision the user needs to decide what to do. And that’s exactly what the offline folder functionality does.

    I understand SyncToy does currently not support collision detection but sync is to always overwrite with the more recent file version.
    So the question is if there are plans to change this behavior and add a collision detection.
    I think most people who need to handle modifications on both sides will have the same problem.

    In order to handle deletions and renaming SyncToy needs to have some info about the situation at the previous sync, so adding a collision detection should be no big deal or am I wrong?

    Cheers Klaus
    Wednesday, September 2, 2009 6:50 AM
  • HI Klaus -

    You are correct - we do have knowledge about the previous sync and we are storing information. SyncToy uses the FileSyncProvider from the Microsoft Sync Framework. The framework definitely supports the ability to bubble up to the user collisions and ask the user for clarification on which update to pick - unfortunately the File Sync Provider takes the path of deciding this for itself. So using SyncToy/FileSyncProvider - there is no way for you do this currently and we are not going to have this in the next version either. It is something we have considered doing but have not had time to implement yet so we will look into it for a future release.

    Thanks
    Deepa
    Deepa ( Microsoft Sync Framework)
    Wednesday, September 2, 2009 6:56 PM