A few months ago, our organization migrated to a hybrid storage setup using Tiger Bridge to synchronize files between local storage and an AWS-based system. Our data analytics team regularly works with large Excel and Access files—often around 60 MB—to build reports and presentations. We have repeatedly recommended moving this kind of shared work to SQL Server, SharePoint, or another proper data platform, but that change has never been prioritized.
Recently, Tiger Bridge has been corrupting some of these files during synchronization, and the incidents seem to be becoming more frequent. When we asked the central data management lead about it, he said we were using Tiger Bridge incorrectly and suggested using SQL Server or SharePoint instead. I agree those platforms would likely be more appropriate, but he never explained what specifically is wrong with our current usage or what configuration or workflow we should use instead.
Is there a known way that large, frequently edited Excel files can be used incorrectly with Tiger Bridge, or is this more likely a synchronization, configuration, or file-locking problem? We currently have to work through a central IT team for Tiger Bridge issues and only have basic access to recover file snapshots, so contacting the vendor directly is difficult.
3 Answers
A shared 60 MB workbook is already a warning sign, and simultaneous editing makes the situation worse. Sync software is not a replacement for a collaborative database or document-management system. Until the workload is moved, consider keeping active work in one authoritative location, preventing concurrent edits where possible, and using versioned backups. Large presentation files edited by many users can fail for the same reason, so this is probably a workflow and architecture problem as well as a possible product issue.
There isn’t enough information to determine whether the files are being used incorrectly. Large files that are edited frequently—especially by multiple people or applications—can be a poor fit for synchronization tools, particularly if changes occur while a file is being uploaded or replicated. The best next step is to document exactly when corruption happens, check the Tiger Bridge logs and file-lock behavior, and have the team responsible for the system open a case with the vendor.
The data management lead may be right that SQL Server or SharePoint is the better long-term design, but that does not explain the corruption by itself. Tiger Bridge should still either synchronize supported files reliably or report a clear conflict or locking error. Ask central IT to verify the supported file types and maximum file sizes, confirm how concurrent edits and open files are handled, and escalate the issue to Tiger Bridge support rather than treating “you’re using it wrong” as a diagnosis.
Our department cannot contact the vendor directly because central IT controls the licensing and administration. We can only recover snapshots, so any investigation will have to go through that team.