Windows Offline Files query
-
Yeah, 2008 is nearly a decade old! One more year to go.
-
I think SAM and Tim are right, sounds like once you go Offline with Offline Folders, you can't get ACL updates until something else happens.
-
@vhinzsanchez said in Windows Offline Files query:
We have Windows 2008 (not R2...I know its quite old, I may get a lot of spanking here..hehehe...
-
Even with the GPO enabled - do offline file/folders sync if the user never touches the files?
I've never tried that.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
Even with the GPO enabled - do offline file/folders sync if the user never touches the files?
I've never tried that.
They would already be synced.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
Even with the GPO enabled - do offline file/folders sync if the user never touches the files?
I've never tried that.
They would already be synced.
So you're saying the GPO would force a sync of files that a user has never touched? I.E. New user - they log in, GPO applies - forces syncing of files to local machine instantly. Is that right?
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
Even with the GPO enabled - do offline file/folders sync if the user never touches the files?
I've never tried that.
They would already be synced.
So you're saying the GPO would force a sync of files that a user has never touched? I.E. New user - they log in, GPO applies - forces syncing of files to local machine instantly. Is that right?
No, I'm saying that if they are never touched, they would not have stopped being in sync. Therefore, still in sync.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
I.E. New user - they log in, GPO applies - forces syncing of files to local machine instantly. Is that right?
I don't think that the GPO does anything here other than turning on Offline Folders. Then OF syncs up at appropriate times (e.g. when the files are out of sync but available to be synced.)
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
I.E. New user - they log in, GPO applies - forces syncing of files to local machine instantly. Is that right?
I don't think that the GPO does anything here other than turning on Offline Folders. Then OF syncs up at appropriate times (e.g. when the files are out of sync but available to be synced.)
OK, then in that case, your suggestion of adding a new file wouldn't actually do anything, because the user never opened the new file.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
I.E. New user - they log in, GPO applies - forces syncing of files to local machine instantly. Is that right?
I don't think that the GPO does anything here other than turning on Offline Folders. Then OF syncs up at appropriate times (e.g. when the files are out of sync but available to be synced.)
OK, then in that case, your suggestion of adding a new file wouldn't actually do anything, because the user never opened the new file.
I agree, that would not work. When did I say that?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
I don't have an offline folder here to work with, but I'm pretty sure that if you were to update the files with new data, and then have the offline folder pick up those changes, that the new ACLs would apply. It's because the offline folder is still acting as offline and working from the cache that the ACLs don't apply yet.
Oh.. you didn't say put a new file - you said update a file with new data... OK I stand corrected - but, this would only work if the file in question had already been synced, so you'd need to update every file in the folder to ensure this would work.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
I don't have an offline folder here to work with, but I'm pretty sure that if you were to update the files with new data, and then have the offline folder pick up those changes, that the new ACLs would apply. It's because the offline folder is still acting as offline and working from the cache that the ACLs don't apply yet.
Oh.. you didn't say put a new file - you said update a file with new data... OK I stand corrected - but, this would only work if the file in question had already been synced, so you'd need to update every file in the folder to ensure this would work.
Possibly, I'm not sure how the sync works. Does it work by file or by folder?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
I don't have an offline folder here to work with, but I'm pretty sure that if you were to update the files with new data, and then have the offline folder pick up those changes, that the new ACLs would apply. It's because the offline folder is still acting as offline and working from the cache that the ACLs don't apply yet.
Oh.. you didn't say put a new file - you said update a file with new data... OK I stand corrected - but, this would only work if the file in question had already been synced, so you'd need to update every file in the folder to ensure this would work.
Possibly, I'm not sure how the sync works. Does it work by file or by folder?
Well, when I get errors, it's always by file. Beyond that, not sure.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
ell, when I get errors, it's always by file. Beyond that, not sure.
Upon checking just now, there are files which was modified on the 13th of Feb..so it should have triggered the syncing...unfortunately, it didn't synchronize the access list.
Just a little history on the timeline so I think the ACL should have been propagated, but as it turned out, was not:
-
Offline availability done months ago.
-
Change in ACL done last week, somewhere in between Feb. 6-10
-
Checked to be still accessible offline on the 14th.
-
Posted to SW and ML on the 15th to check if I have done some mis-configuration which I might be unaware of.
-
-
Even the one file that was modified did not update its own ACLs?
-
In what way were the ACLs changed? How would the changes have affected the person in question?
-
What's amazing is if you Google this topic, this thread is the top hit!
-
I just realized something. I think that the ACLs will never update. Those aren't the same files. That's a cache. It's just an automated process of the end user taking the files that they needed and storing them locally. In theory, if the ACL is updated centrally it should stop the remote user from updating the file to the central repository, but should never cut the end user off from their own copy of the file.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
I just realized something. I think that the ACLs will never update. Those aren't the same files. That's a cache. It's just an automated process of the end user taking the files that they needed and storing them locally. In theory, if the ACL is updated centrally it should stop the remote user from updating the file to the central repository, but should never cut the end user off from their own copy of the file.
Yeah that's a good point - if the whole folder is no longer accessible, even what the OP did to resolve his issue shouldn't have worked, unless that working was to just delete the local copies because access wasn't allowed anymore.
-
@Dashrender said in Windows Offline Files query:
@scottalanmiller said in Windows Offline Files query:
I just realized something. I think that the ACLs will never update. Those aren't the same files. That's a cache. It's just an automated process of the end user taking the files that they needed and storing them locally. In theory, if the ACL is updated centrally it should stop the remote user from updating the file to the central repository, but should never cut the end user off from their own copy of the file.
Yeah that's a good point - if the whole folder is no longer accessible, even what the OP did to resolve his issue shouldn't have worked, unless that working was to just delete the local copies because access wasn't allowed anymore.
And I have a feeling that it would never do that - delete the whole thing. Because once it is cached, it is owned by the remote user.
