Sorry for my poor English. I read many posts in here and find that I'm not the first to have this kind of question. Probably because I don't have a good idea of what are under the hood of FreeFileSync, I still be confused and unsafe regarding the best way to do things.
My case is this one: I have two folders on different hard drive and I want first backup those to an external drive (M:) and second make an home made like RAID1 on a second one (P:) more portable. I have try two config. This one:
W:\ ----> M:\RAID1\ARCHIVE
D:\NAS-1 ----> M:\RAID1\NAS-1
M:\RAID1 ----> P:\RAID1
- FFSync3pairs.jpg (21.9 KiB) Viewed 276 times
with this one until the first complete sync I had a warning about "Multiple folder pairs write to a common subfolder" but after the the first sync the message have disappeared. I preferred this method because its seem to me more manageable (just 3 entries). I back track to my original setup and try this config:
W:\ ----> M:\RAID1\ARCHIVE
D:\NAS-1 ----> M:\RAID1\NAS-1
M:\RAID1\ARCHIVE ----> P:\RAID1\ARCHIVE
M:\RAID1\NAS-1 ----> P:\RAID1\NAS-1
- FFSync4pairs.jpg (30 KiB) Viewed 276 times
In that case no warning but 4 entries and a bit more complex to handle.
Obviously I have also think to make two separate job being sure that the first one finished before the second begin. But at that time I thinking that the sequence (first to last) in the interface will be fallow in the two other approach. Right now, I'm not so sure...
So my questions are what are the impacts of each approach including the one with 2 separate jobs. Witch one is safest or less dangerous for bad or imprevisible results. By the way, delayed by a "time space" in a scheduler the two seperate job are not an option since I never know how long the first one will take. And I also ask my self if some local filters in the 3 entries approach could do the job without warning?
Thank you
Jean
