Mark
2010-01-27 21:33:02 UTC
Hi...
I have a batch file I'm launching from a web page using psexec.exe. The
last stage of the batch file is to copy a file to several locations. The
problem is that 2 of the 3 destinations are going through a network pipe the
size of a swizzle stick.
I was hoping to cut down on the pain by parallelizing the copies with START
(i.e. move the actual XCOPY command into its own little bat and have the
parent bat start them all at once).
I figured that the bottleneck is the network pipe, not the disk access to
the local file being copied so I might save some time by getting all the
copies going at once.
Problem is that when I ran this up the flagpole, the parent bat just hung at
the start command. Didn't copy anything. Is START something you shouldn't
use when you're already in the background? Or running under psexec?
Thanks
Mark
I have a batch file I'm launching from a web page using psexec.exe. The
last stage of the batch file is to copy a file to several locations. The
problem is that 2 of the 3 destinations are going through a network pipe the
size of a swizzle stick.
I was hoping to cut down on the pain by parallelizing the copies with START
(i.e. move the actual XCOPY command into its own little bat and have the
parent bat start them all at once).
I figured that the bottleneck is the network pipe, not the disk access to
the local file being copied so I might save some time by getting all the
copies going at once.
Problem is that when I ran this up the flagpole, the parent bat just hung at
the start command. Didn't copy anything. Is START something you shouldn't
use when you're already in the background? Or running under psexec?
Thanks
Mark