Technically, I get the difference between the two; this is just a usage question.

In particular, I want to move some folders off of a smaller hard drive and onto a larger one, but I need to use some sort of link to do it--the application that uses these files only expects them to be where they currently are, and isn't configurable.

I'm not sure which argument I should pass to mklink: /J or /D. In doing some research on the web, places seem to just pick one or the other without explaining why they made that choice.

The data consists of many small files and folders, which are read and written to quite frequently, if that's something that would affect the decision.

Any thoughts?



Because Symbolic Links have more functionality, they are preferred, but if the disk may need to be used with pre-Vista Windows operating systems (including boot discs), use Junctions instead.

| improve this answer | |
  • What kind of extra functionality do symbolic links have over junctions? – Cray Mar 13 '11 at 12:12
  • @Cray: They can point to targets on other hosts through network, targets that do not exist, and they support relative paths. More info here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_junction_point – paradroid Mar 14 '11 at 16:10
  • @Cray: One advantage of junction points which I was unaware of until recently can be seen here: superuser.com/questions/254957/… – paradroid Mar 14 '11 at 16:11

They are essentially the same. Use a Symlink for Vista and up. Directory Junctions are there for compatibility with Windows 2000 and up.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.