Hello,
I spent two days reading posts here and couldn't figure out this.
I am using SyncBack Pro and need to switch over to FFS.
What I need:
- Backup partition "D:" (exclude some folders) to the external HDD using the "Mirror" option
- When that operation is finished, make an identical copy of the external HDD to the Hetzner Storage Box
So, the idea is to have a filtered backup on the external HDD and an exact copy of that HDD on Hetzner. Basically, I want a redundant backup of partition "D:" on the external HDD and Hetzner.
Must run daily in the background without interruptions. I am planning to use FFS on Zorin OS.
I will donate to this project if the "Donation" edition is required for this setup. But, I need to know if this is even possible before I switch to FSS.
Thanks! :)
Backup to HDD and then to Hetzner Box
- Posts: 11
- Joined: 5 Jun 2024
- Posts: 2438
- Joined: 22 Aug 2012
I don't know Zorin OS. So, I can't tell if FreeFileSync (FFS) runs on it. Just test this first.
Neither do I know Herzner Boxes, but if you can access those via File Explorer (or the like), even the standard (non-donation) version of FFS can do what you want.
But in your proposed setup (D: => External HDD and External HDD => Hetzner Box) it needs to be two runs in sequence, first the D: => External HDD sync and after that one finished the External HDD => Hetzner Box sync, assuming you want the updated data coming from D: to also be updated on Hetzner Box "directly" and not only when running the next sync.
If there is no additional data on External HDD that needs to be synced to Hetzner Box (beyond the data that came from D: ), it is simpler, and probably even beter to also sync D: directly with Hetzner Box, so
D: => External HDD and D: => Hetzner Box, using two left-right base folder pairs.
This has the advantage that it is a single sync configuration and run, and you create both backups, straight from the source, instead of via-via.
If there is additional data on External HDD that needs to be synced to Hetzner Box (beyond the data that came from D: ), you can create a third left-right base folder pair External HDD => Hetzner Box, for which you use a (possibly local) Include or Exclude Filter to have that 3rd pair only sync the to-be-synced data that does not come from D:
Neither do I know Herzner Boxes, but if you can access those via File Explorer (or the like), even the standard (non-donation) version of FFS can do what you want.
But in your proposed setup (D: => External HDD and External HDD => Hetzner Box) it needs to be two runs in sequence, first the D: => External HDD sync and after that one finished the External HDD => Hetzner Box sync, assuming you want the updated data coming from D: to also be updated on Hetzner Box "directly" and not only when running the next sync.
If there is no additional data on External HDD that needs to be synced to Hetzner Box (beyond the data that came from D: ), it is simpler, and probably even beter to also sync D: directly with Hetzner Box, so
D: => External HDD and D: => Hetzner Box, using two left-right base folder pairs.
This has the advantage that it is a single sync configuration and run, and you create both backups, straight from the source, instead of via-via.
If there is additional data on External HDD that needs to be synced to Hetzner Box (beyond the data that came from D: ), you can create a third left-right base folder pair External HDD => Hetzner Box, for which you use a (possibly local) Include or Exclude Filter to have that 3rd pair only sync the to-be-synced data that does not come from D:
- Posts: 11
- Joined: 5 Jun 2024
Zorin OS is based on Ubuntu linux, I mentioned that only because I need help with scheduling the task so the sync happens automatically :)
Hetzner Box has WebDav and sFTP support, so it shouldn't be a problem.
No, I do not need to backup additional content from the external HDD to Hetzner, those two should be identical (Hetzner is a redundant copy).
Ok so, about your approach: FFS will simultaneously copy data from D: to the HDD AND Hetzner at the same time? It is basically one task/job?
What about backup time? Is your approach 2x faster than a sequential approach (since two backups are running at the same time)?
Thank you :)
Hetzner Box has WebDav and sFTP support, so it shouldn't be a problem.
No, I do not need to backup additional content from the external HDD to Hetzner, those two should be identical (Hetzner is a redundant copy).
Ok so, about your approach: FFS will simultaneously copy data from D: to the HDD AND Hetzner at the same time? It is basically one task/job?
What about backup time? Is your approach 2x faster than a sequential approach (since two backups are running at the same time)?
Thank you :)
- Posts: 2438
- Joined: 22 Aug 2012
> Ok so, about your approach: FFS will simultaneously copy data from D: to the HDD AND Hetzner at the same time?
In theory: yes.
Hardware limitations or shared use of interfaces may limit a true/full simultaneousness
> It is basically one task/job?
It is then a single FFS sync configuration that needs to be launched, instead of two sync configurations that need to be run sequentially.
> What about backup time? Is your approach 2x faster than a sequential approach (since two backups are running at the same time)?
Assuming the D:-drive is native to the machine you run the FFS instance on, it will certainly be faster than the sum of the two sequential syncs, and may even be (almost) 2x faster (and perhaps even more).
How much faster really depends on the speed of your connections to your backup devices, the write- and read-speeds of your D:-drive and External HDD, and the write speed of the Hetzner Box.
I am just guessing your External HHD is a local, USB connected device, and the Hetzner Box a remote network connected device or service. In that case, they would at least not share interfaces.
The biggest "gain" in speed is probably that for the backup to the Hetzner Box, the data does not first need to come from your External HDD to the machine running FFS (to which the D:-drive is assumed to be native) and only then goes to the Hertzner Box, but rather goes straight from the D-drive to the Hertzner Box. This argument is likely even more relevant if your native D:-drive is an SSD.
But the two prime reasons for my suggested approach are
• to have just a single FFS job that needs to be launched (instead of two in sequence) and
• maintaining maximum data integrity, as you copy both backups straight from the source (instead of your second backup from your first backup).
Any speed increase may be an additional benefit. But unless backup times would become excessive, the duration of backup runs is normally not very relevant.
In theory: yes.
Hardware limitations or shared use of interfaces may limit a true/full simultaneousness
> It is basically one task/job?
It is then a single FFS sync configuration that needs to be launched, instead of two sync configurations that need to be run sequentially.
> What about backup time? Is your approach 2x faster than a sequential approach (since two backups are running at the same time)?
Assuming the D:-drive is native to the machine you run the FFS instance on, it will certainly be faster than the sum of the two sequential syncs, and may even be (almost) 2x faster (and perhaps even more).
How much faster really depends on the speed of your connections to your backup devices, the write- and read-speeds of your D:-drive and External HDD, and the write speed of the Hetzner Box.
I am just guessing your External HHD is a local, USB connected device, and the Hetzner Box a remote network connected device or service. In that case, they would at least not share interfaces.
The biggest "gain" in speed is probably that for the backup to the Hetzner Box, the data does not first need to come from your External HDD to the machine running FFS (to which the D:-drive is assumed to be native) and only then goes to the Hertzner Box, but rather goes straight from the D-drive to the Hertzner Box. This argument is likely even more relevant if your native D:-drive is an SSD.
But the two prime reasons for my suggested approach are
• to have just a single FFS job that needs to be launched (instead of two in sequence) and
• maintaining maximum data integrity, as you copy both backups straight from the source (instead of your second backup from your first backup).
Any speed increase may be an additional benefit. But unless backup times would become excessive, the duration of backup runs is normally not very relevant.
- Posts: 11
- Joined: 5 Jun 2024
Thank you so much for the detailed explanation!
It makes sense, I will configure the task as you described.
Thank you again man! :)
It makes sense, I will configure the task as you described.
Thank you again man! :)