FreeFileSync ForumThe official discussion platform for FreeFileSync2019-05-15T06:02:01+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/app.php/feed/topic/60872019-05-15T06:02:01+00:002019-05-15T06:02:01+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20807#p20807 Could it be that you made different hardlinked pairs on both sides, e.g. different file date, being copied then by the sync process?
I also tested existing hardlinks: 1. Create a file 2. Sync it 3. Manually Hardlink it on both sides to the same path 4. Sync again => no differences reported, no action.
But as soon as you change the files, FFS will consider them as different and copy all instances, breaking the hardlinks of course.
If you need hardlinks to be copied, have a look at syncovery / superflexible (commercial, starting at 35EUR). Tons of options. It also seems to handle folder renames. But FFS looks much better.
]]>2019-05-14T18:36:04+00:002019-05-14T18:36:04+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20803#p20803For the purpose of clarity I omitted to mention that my sync test actually went through a NAS (real test was : NTFS <-> NAS <-> NTFS) but in my opinion IT SHOULD NOT change the point I make : I checked that a manual copy/paste of files from NAS to NTFS do preserve the hardlink structure in the target NTFS volume, while FFS sync does not.
]]>2019-05-14T17:49:10+00:002019-05-14T17:49:10+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20802#p20802 As you all mentioned, FFS does not propagate hardlinks. But what happens if the hardlinks have been created on both side BEFORE syncing ? ... I made the test with a result which surprised me :
Test description : NTFS Volume on left side : 2 files hardlinked together NTFS Volume on right side : 2 files hardlinked together, same relative paths same names as in left volume Then I synced, and then checked the hardlink structure (fsutil hardlink list command)
Result : I was anticipating that the hardlink structure would be preserved... Why ? Because I thought that the sync operation would operate sequentially - file by file - using the underlying Windows copy process (I even checked that to be sure : if I manually copy/paste each file from left volume to the right volume, Windows preserves the hardlink structure).
But guess what ! After FFS sync, HARDLINK STRUCTURE WAS NOT PRESERVED ! FFS broke it : the 2 target files were not hardlinked anymore. It might seem very odd..
Can someone reproduce this test ? Can Zenju tell us if the underlying FFS copy process is so different that a classic Windows copy operation ?
]]>2019-03-14T06:31:52+00:002019-03-14T06:31:52+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20358#p20358 Is there any alternative to FreeFileSync copying hardlinks?
]]>2019-03-13T00:51:08+00:002019-03-13T00:51:08+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20348#p20348
]]>2019-02-21T02:00:24+00:002019-02-21T02:00:24+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20131#p20131 Outside of FreeFileSync, one could investigate solutions that reduce space used by doing a scan and hardlink replacement.
]]>2019-02-12T03:06:59+00:002019-02-12T03:06:59+00:00https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20016#p20016 viewtopic.php?t=4902
In this post the user mentions how hardlinked files will be synced to the new location as two copies of the same file.
Is there a way to get FFS to recognize and sync hardlinked files as hardlinked files?
]]>