Synchronize by content?

Hi again,

The only thing I am missing in WinSCP so far is the ability to synchronize by content. I can imagine that means actually downloading the remote file (in the background) in order to compare it, so it would be slower, but still it would be a great feature. Have you thought about it - will we see it anytime soon?

Cheers -

I do not plan this. But maybe if more people ask (you are the first)... :-)

I may be the first but I am definitely not alone - see here: https://www.ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=4567

It is important as many files, esp. various config and smaller files, do not always change size, and comparison by timestamp is sometimes problematic.

Comparison by content would be the safest of all synchronization methods. And it could be really easy to implement - just calculate and compare the hash values of each pair of files.

Thanks for considering this :)

Vacilando wrote:

I may be the first but I am definitely not alone - see here: https://www.ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=4567

But you are still the first one asking for this feature in WinSCP :-)

Comparison by content would be the safest of all synchronization methods. And it could be really easy to implement - just calculate and compare the hash values of each pair of files.

But how do I get hash of remote file? SFTP protocol supports this only as optional extension since version 5. And there is no SFTP server I'm aware of supporting protocol version 5. The most widely used SFTP server, shipped with OpenSSH, supports only version 3.

:)

But how do I get hash of remote file? SFTP protocol supports this only as optional extension since version 5. And there is no SFTP server I'm aware of supporting protocol version 5. The most widely used SFTP server, shipped with OpenSSH, supports only version 3.

You are right; and I would not propose anything that would require changes on peoples' servers. No. I thought you could actually download the remote file to a temporary place on the background and do the comparison (actually it does not need to be hash then).

I know it would be SLOW but well, it is again on the user whether s/he uses it. In some cases it is vital. And, speed of the Net increases every day.

Vacilando wrote:

I know it would be SLOW but well, it is again on the user whether s/he uses it. In some cases it is vital. And, speed of the Net increases every day.

But I do not think I want to go this way.

Again: Maybe, but only if more people ask for this.