Hi
First of all, thank you for the wonderful tool.
I would like to get FreeFileSync to work in a particular manner, but i'm not sure what would be the correct configuration.
Let me detail what I would like to achieve:
I have some users, each one uses his/her own laptop. FreeFileSync is configured on each laptop to synchronize against a server. The chosen method is "Mirror". Some users will soon move to newer laptops and will have FreeFileSync installed with our common configuration ("Mirror"). My concern is that due to the "Mirror" configuration, the information stored in the server will be deleted (Item exists on right side only).
What would be the best configuration to avoid this?
Any help is appreciated.
Concern about "mirroring"
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 5 Feb 2018
-
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 22 Aug 2012
You do not mention the Mirror direction. Laptop to server or server to laptop
If files are only modified on the server and thus the status on the server is the "reference" and the laptops simply need to locally see (but not change) the server status as per the latest sync, then a server to laptop Mirror-sync might be the way to go.
However, if the laptops will change their local copies, and that needs to translate back to the server and consequently the other laptops, then Mirror is not the way to go.
You would rather need to use two-way-sync(s) between each of the laptops and the server.
Still, if a distinct file gets changed in between syncs on more than one laptop, you would have a sync-conflict, that would need to be resolved manually.
If the laptops would be continuously on-line, consider always work on the server and not have local copies?
Obviously, you would need to backup your server.
If files are only modified on the server and thus the status on the server is the "reference" and the laptops simply need to locally see (but not change) the server status as per the latest sync, then a server to laptop Mirror-sync might be the way to go.
However, if the laptops will change their local copies, and that needs to translate back to the server and consequently the other laptops, then Mirror is not the way to go.
You would rather need to use two-way-sync(s) between each of the laptops and the server.
Still, if a distinct file gets changed in between syncs on more than one laptop, you would have a sync-conflict, that would need to be resolved manually.
If the laptops would be continuously on-line, consider always work on the server and not have local copies?
Obviously, you would need to backup your server.
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 5 Feb 2018
Thank you Plerry.
Sorry not to mention earlier 2 important things:
1.- The mirror is laptop -> server
2.- The destination folder is based on %username% so both current laptop and new laptop of the user will sync against the same path.
Apart from that, to simplify, consider I have only 1 user, as our users cannot see/work/sync anything beyond their "%username% folder" (controlled by NTFS permissions).
Another point is that once the user gets a new laptop, he/she is no longer using the old one (it will be formatted). So, the information on the server will always come from just 1 source.
I see Mirror is not the way to go and I will have to change it to something else. I'll test Two-Way, but I would like to check if there is some custom configuration that suits my needs.
Thanks again, much appreciated.
Sorry not to mention earlier 2 important things:
1.- The mirror is laptop -> server
2.- The destination folder is based on %username% so both current laptop and new laptop of the user will sync against the same path.
Apart from that, to simplify, consider I have only 1 user, as our users cannot see/work/sync anything beyond their "%username% folder" (controlled by NTFS permissions).
Another point is that once the user gets a new laptop, he/she is no longer using the old one (it will be formatted). So, the information on the server will always come from just 1 source.
I see Mirror is not the way to go and I will have to change it to something else. I'll test Two-Way, but I would like to check if there is some custom configuration that suits my needs.
Thanks again, much appreciated.
-
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Ah, that clarifies a lot!
The data on the server is not shared between different laptops, apart from at the time of migration from an old laptop to a new one. And the Mirror sync is normally used to "backup" the laptop data to the server.
Obviously, when using a laptop-to-server Mirror-sync, when running such sync on an "empty" new laptop will delete the server data and not "restore" data from the server to the new laptop.
So, on a new laptop you would need to initially run a server-to-laptop Mirror-sync to "restore" the server data to the new laptop (or some other form of copying files from the server to the new laptop), after which you then reinstate the "normal" frequent laptop-to-server Mirror-sync.
(This should result in a workable, but not very professionally sounding solution ...)
Instead of using Mirror-syncs, you might consider using two-way syncs.
When only creating, modifying and deleting files on the laptop (and not on the server), this will normally act similar to a laptop-to-server Mirror-sync. But when running this the first time on a new ("empty") laptop, should act similar to a server-to-laptop Mirror-sync.
But make sure to first try this (or any proposed solution) using test-data; not on "the real thing".
You might also consider to select Versioning as your Delete Files method, and choose a Versioning location in e.g. the users home or %username% part on the server that preferably does not overlap with users data-location on the server.
The user can then always restore the last or any previous version (depending on the exact setting selected for Versioning) of a deleted or modified file. (And would also act as a safety-net if things go wrong during a "restore" to a new laptop).
The data on the server is not shared between different laptops, apart from at the time of migration from an old laptop to a new one. And the Mirror sync is normally used to "backup" the laptop data to the server.
Obviously, when using a laptop-to-server Mirror-sync, when running such sync on an "empty" new laptop will delete the server data and not "restore" data from the server to the new laptop.
So, on a new laptop you would need to initially run a server-to-laptop Mirror-sync to "restore" the server data to the new laptop (or some other form of copying files from the server to the new laptop), after which you then reinstate the "normal" frequent laptop-to-server Mirror-sync.
(This should result in a workable, but not very professionally sounding solution ...)
Instead of using Mirror-syncs, you might consider using two-way syncs.
When only creating, modifying and deleting files on the laptop (and not on the server), this will normally act similar to a laptop-to-server Mirror-sync. But when running this the first time on a new ("empty") laptop, should act similar to a server-to-laptop Mirror-sync.
But make sure to first try this (or any proposed solution) using test-data; not on "the real thing".
You might also consider to select Versioning as your Delete Files method, and choose a Versioning location in e.g. the users home or %username% part on the server that preferably does not overlap with users data-location on the server.
The user can then always restore the last or any previous version (depending on the exact setting selected for Versioning) of a deleted or modified file. (And would also act as a safety-net if things go wrong during a "restore" to a new laptop).
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 5 Feb 2018
Thank you again for your help, Plerry!
I will definitely test two-way syncs.
However my concern is on the possible network impact of this methodology (what if several new laptops are attempting to gather contents from the server?). Maybe I could switch to "Two-Way" but perform the "initial load" by a different approach.
I will definitely test two-way syncs.
However my concern is on the possible network impact of this methodology (what if several new laptops are attempting to gather contents from the server?). Maybe I could switch to "Two-Way" but perform the "initial load" by a different approach.
-
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Running FreeFileSync (FFS), should not form substantial extra load to the network over some other way of initially loading data to the new laptops, e.g. by a "plain" file-copy.
After all, it is mostly the data-files that needs to be copied over, and FFS should not be less efficient in that than other methods of file-copy.
After all, it is mostly the data-files that needs to be copied over, and FFS should not be less efficient in that than other methods of file-copy.
