[Feature request] RSYNC

[r3incarnat0r]

Hello,

first I'd like to thank you for the great app!

I know there were already some mentions about rsync on this forum years ago, so besides general advantage of minimizing data transfers of suitable large files, there's another thing that's worth considering.

In these days, when ransomware is SMB-aware, I became a bit worried, that in case of infection, it would "see" for example even NAS backup shares, so it came to my mind, if it couln't be safer to just disable SMB share for this purpose, and let FFS to make backups rather using other protocol like rsync.

Yes, I can use SFTP, but I'm still missing delta copy feature. :) Having SSDs on PCs, I don't need to care about read I/O, on the other hand, having 8 Mbit upload on DSL line, it's practically impossible for example to periodically transfer large Outlook PST files and VM HDD images from Windows, even on LAN it's pain if backups are frequent. Since already using FFS for syncing drives and LAN folders, it would be awesome to have rsync, too, in all-in-one app. ;)

Please consider to implement this protocol, thanks!

[Plerry]

One more reason to run FFS under unique user credentials, and only giving the "FFS-user" write access to the backup share on your NAS and all other/normal users at best read access.

[schnappi]

Rsync requires that both the server and client are running rsync. Wish it didn't though. But yes it would be awesome if FreeFileSync could do same as rsync -P (partial file transfers).

[JNJN]

Some thoughts;

* Use snapshots on the backup storage if backing up with Rsync. For example Btrfs and ZFS (BSD/Linux) or NTFS (Windows) etc
* Do not automatically remove old snapshots when storage on the backup server is running low. Otherwise all healthy versions of the files will be gone and the backup will be filled with corrupt files.
* For clients running macOS Time Machine looks good since it is storing old versions, but one of the problems is that the backups are usually stored in the same security context as the infected user. The viruses may become Time Machine aware in the same way as they are SMB-aware.

[webmaster33]

+1 vote for RSYNC support or delta copy support.

I backup my files on one drive to another using FreeFilesync v9.3 (Windows).
I also have virtual PC files, which can be as much as 750 Gb, so especially for these files the delta sync/rsync would be very useful.

[huersch]

Hi!

First at all: Thank you for this great app. I use it since a lot of years.

Also in my eyes RSYNC would be great, especially synchronizing large virtual Drives with some GB, if there are only less data changed.

Thanks a lot.

[huersch]

Still interested in RSync because I use some large Veracryfiles in whom there are only small changes. And the server is able to comunicate with RSYNC. It would decrease the Data-Volume very much.

Thanks a lot for freefilesync even if there is no RSYNC

[schnappi]

@huersch

FreeFileSync will never be able to have/ utilize rysnc. Rsync must be installed on both the source and destination in order to function. FreeFileSync is only ever utilized/ running on one end (source or destination) of the sync.

[Zenju]

FreeFileSync will never be able to have/ utilize rysnc.

Of course it's possible to integrate rsync into FreeFileSync, just as there is support for other non-local file systems like (S)FTP. Nothing is fixed in this regard.

[schnappi]

Even if rsync was integrated rsync can only be used if it the external host also had rsync installed.

[Dockter]

Any chance of this feature being added Zenju? I purchased this software with hopes of it being an eventual feature. We have two NAS devices we synchronize which are constantly being changed but I would only like to send the changes since they are SSD based NAS devices. We are talking about 25 million files and around 28TB total space.

[Dockter]

I would also like to add that I would be willing to pay several hundred dollars for this feature provided it continued its multi-threaded approach that you recently added. Thanks,