There's no documented function in Windows to do this, as the concept "append file x to file y". Thus, nothing in .NET to do this.
You'd have to write something that modified the filesystem. In FAT it would be pretty easy, simply modify the file allocation table for the first file (replacing the last link to the first sector of the second file) and remove the table entry for the second file. This is all pretty low-level and would have to take into account many things to make it reliable. On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:20:15 -0600, Michael Sharpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Is it at all possible to combine 2 (or more) data files together without >A) opening the data files to read and B) creating a "new" file out of >them? > >For example, lets say I have one file that is 20MB and a second file that >is 50MB. What I want to have happen is for the second data file to just >be appended to the first but without Windows or the file system having to >read any data. Basically I just want the FAT to take the 50MB file and >attach it to the end of the 20MB file as a file fragment. I suppose this >is more of a file join than an append. > >This is how it seems to work now: >File 1 + File 2 = > >1) Create File 3 >2) Read contents of File 1 into File 3 >3) Read contents of File 2 into File 3 > > >This is how I want it to work: >File 1 + File 2 = > >1) File 1 is left alone except for the EOF position. >2) EOF position is removed from File 1 and is now an address pointer to >the start of File 2 >3) File 2 has any header information stripped from it >4) EOF becomes the end of File 2 >5) File 1 is now a fragmented file since neither file is moved yet it >contains the contents of File 1 and File 2 > > > > >I know that there are some file systems available on other platforms that >can do this joining of files without the overhead of having to build a >file and read data into it. Is this at all possible in windows? I don't >care if it used .NET, C++, C, etc. >And I am aware that file fragmentation is not always a good thing but in >this case, I am more than willing to accept file fragmentation for the >speed especially when this needs to be done over many groups of files. If >this needs to be done on let's saw 1,000 files that are 120GB total in >size, I don't want the file system to rebuild 120GB of data that I already >have but is just in different pieces. I want to just stick the pieces >together. =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
