New version: 4.3.5.2256

[Flo]

A new version has just been released, with the new feature "disc spanning". You can use it to divide a data compilation on multiple discs or ISO images, by using "Disc --> Disc spanning" from the menu.
Additionally, a couple of bugs have been fixed.

[ajay100]

Was very excited about this, but how does the 'disc spanning' work? I tried it with a 17GB uncompressed backup in a typical folder structure and file sizes 1kB to 2GB. The 4 DVD-Rs ended up with files all over the place. This will be a real killer feature if it uses FIFO with perhaps some manual decision making (where to make the split). Many thanks for the program!

[Flo]

Currently, it just splits "optimally". If I would be keeping folders on the same disc, some space might be unused.

Feel free to suggest some options though. You'd need to be a bit more specific about how you want to not have "files all over the place".

[jason_ruz]

Could you add an option to disc spanning so that when files are in folders, it only splits at the folder level? The disc spanning would just try to minimise the amount of unused space by choosing which folders should go together on which disc.

For example, say I have 16 0.5GB files split between four folders in the following manner:
FolderA 2GB (4 files)
FolderB 3GB (6 files)
FolderC 2GB (4 files)
FolderD 1GB (2 files)

I want disc spanning to fit the four folders onto two DVDs like so:
Disc 1 = contains FolderA and FolderC
Disc 2 = contains FolderB and FolderD

I don't want disc spanning to split up my folders and do something like this:
Disc 1 = contains FolderA and 4 files in FolderB
Disc 2 = contains the remaining 2 files in FolderB, and the entire FolderC and FolderD.
Here, FolderB is split between two discs unnecessarily. Perhaps the only case where a folder should be split between discs is if the folder cannot fit on one disc (e.g. if you are trying to put a 5GB folder on a regular single-layer DVD); otherwise I'd prefer to have unused space on the disc than a folder split.

Thanks!

[Flo]

But at what level of depth do you want to split (or not to)? That is: What about subfolders? Maybe you hast have a single folder in the root with subfolders - then in your case splitting would not be possible at all.

[ajay100]

OK, I knew this would be a tricky one. I would not agree with jason_ruz for my use, however I can appreciate different points of view.

When I burn a backup set, I want to know they are in sequential order. The splitting could occur at any level, as long as it is sequential. Here are some more ideas:

1. Fully automatic, sequential. Use as many disks as required, split at necessary size points, split folders if necessary. After calculating, a list is shown for confirmation prior to burning. i.e. 17GB could produce Disk1 - 4GB, Disk2 - 3.5GB, Disk3 - 4.5GB, Disk4 - 2GB, Disk5 - 3GB

2. Fully automatic, sequential, split folders, split files (with 7zip algorithm or similar). This would produce the most optimised sequential outcome. Tricky to program? More of a nuisance for operator, but not as frustrating as multiple differential backup sets... i.e. 17GB could produce Disk1 - 4.7GB, Disk2 - 4.7GB, Disk3 - 4.7GB, Disk4 - 2.9GB

3. Semi automatic. Firstly work out roughly as per 1. above. Then provide a way to drag and drop to/from a pool, down to file level. Files could also be removed from the 'pool'. These methods may seem slower, but they would still be faster than creating new compositions for each disk (and the errors that can occur in selecting the files) and would provide a great deal of flexibility.
a/ One method would involve a window pane showing the 'pool' of folders and files to burn at the top (as per the lower left hand screen in the current 'data compilation' window) and as many panes as expected disks (up to a maximum of, say 5), showing the proposed contents. You could then drag and drop the files around the windows quickly to suit. A disk pane could then be removed from the set if it is empty.
b/ Another way would be to show 1 disk at a time and have the 'pool' shrink or grow as you dragged files to or from the disk. Select the next disk when ready.

Hopefully these ideas might help to create another option to the current splitting scheme. And I appreciate the effort in introducing splitting!

[Flo]

With 7zip algorithm or similar: I don't think that 7z tries to keep folders together. Afaik, as it would be expected for compression program, it just splits the outcoming compressed file at a certain point, without considering what's inside the archives.

1. Fully automatic, sequential. Use as many disks as required, split at necessary size points, split folders if necessary.

That's not actually a real algorithm
Split folders at which level? Maybe you can give some examples with real file/folder structures to explain your expected behaviour?

[wasudeo]

seems to be good one as equivalent to nero.it is not clear demo or free version.

[markchicobaby]

Flo re the algorithm needed to split the compilation at parts that "make sense" I think it is best to keep it as simple as possible.

The idea would be to split it at the folder level, as high as possible in the tree. The algorithm should attempt to use as few CDs as possible and to keep related files together. These

Example 1: 1 GB compilation to be slit into 700MB CDs, trivial case
folder1 - 500MB => to cd1
folder2 - 200MB => to cd1
folder3 - 300MB => to cd2

Example 2: 1GB to CD, keep related files together if possible.
folder1 - 650 MB => to cd1
folder2 - 100 MB => to cd2 (no split of folder2 if it will fit on the next disk)
folder3 - 250 MB => to cd2

Here the algorithm has moved all of folder2 to CD2 as it will fit, and this keeps related files together (ie assume all files in folder2 are related).

Example 3: 1GB to CD, worse case, split a folder
folder1 - 750 MB => 700MB to CD1 and the rest to CD2, in alphabetical order.

I think these three cases represent most of the situations and decisions the algorithm needs to make, if you use recursion on the folder tree. The higher the split occurs the better as this keeps more related files together.

In all cases it should write a log of what folders moved where, to the root directory.

Good luck, hope these ideas are useuful.

[Bob59157535]

There is a program called DVD Span that does a good job of splitting files over discs. I thought I would post how it does its spitting

copied and pasted from the dvd span site

Click one of the buttons in the Make into disks section:

In Order splits the files and folders between disks, in the order that you dragged them into the source list. If a folder is too big to fit on a disk, DVDSpan will write as much of it as possible to the disk, and then write the rest of that folder to the next disk. This is the simplest disk layout to restore from, but also the least efficient.

Re-order but keep top-level is the next most efficient option. It will find the best way to organize the top-level folders in the source list across DVDs, but will not split up the contents of those folders between disks (Note: top-level refers to the individual folders you dragged to the source list). This works great so long as none of your folders are too big to fit on one disk.

Re-order to fit the most files is the most efficient option; the order that each file is written to each disk is optimized to fit as much as possible on each disk. In order to restore a single folder using this organization, however, you will have to check each burned disk for files from that folder.

Note that all of these options maintain the directory and subdirectory structure of the source files/folders.

I think that's the best way to do it tbh, with choices of how the user wants the discs

[Flo]

I believe that my options are pretty close already. I don't use the order of which folders you dragged, since you probably won't remember it anyway. CDBurnerXP's interface is not suited for such an option, and I wouldn't quite like to have CDBurnerXP look like DVD Span