Backup synchronization program

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

I am looking for a software with such caveats:
● backups by coping all [even empty] sub-folders to chosen location
● real-time or almost real-time monitoring of changes in source folders
● Windows 10
● freeware
● open source
● GUI with dark mode / theme support
● no transfer / data limits
● standalone [i.e. not included as a feature of a file manager or security suite]

Does anyone uses such software and is pleases with it?

[ChrisGreaves]

Does anyone uses such software and is pleases with it?

Thy Grand Voidinesss might take a look at Windows RoboCopy - part of a suite known as RKTools (Resource Kit TOOLS).
I suspect that it does not meet all your requirements, especially cosmetic (Dark Mode), but probably meets all your functional requirements.

I have been using it for 10+ years, and will ferret out sections of the 35-page manual if you like.
Cheers, Chris

[meteorquake]

I've not used this particular part but there's also RealTimeSync as part of FreeFileSync -
https://freefilesync.org/manual.php?topic=realtimesync
d

[horst.epp]

DSynchronize
http://dimio.altervista.org/eng/dsynchr ... onize.html
Its not open source but free.
No dark theme, what I don't miss it in a tool which I don't need very often to open the GUI.
Allows backups including versions and also can watch folder changes.
Its higly configurable.

[therube]

dslreports: FreeFileSync 12.3 has been released!
([I've not read, but] FFS does not have Dark mode?)

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

Anyone / anything else?


For now I am testing out

DSynchronize
[...]

It works but I already see in it some glitches / user-unfriendliness; but it is a choice: do I accept them and use energy on keeping in mind those that might affect reliability of my mirror-backup - or do I potentially waste a whole bunch of time seeking / trying out another program, a one with has a forum where users can report bugs and make inquires?

[horst.epp]

Anyone / anything else?


For now I am testing out

DSynchronize
[...]

It works but I already see in it some glitches / user-unfriendliness; but it is a choice: do I accept them and use energy on keeping in mind those that might affect reliability of my mirror-backup - or do I potentially waste a whole bunch of time seeking / trying out another program, a one with has a forum where users can report bugs and make inquires?

The Author reacts to mails and for me it runs stable since a long time.
Its continuously updated.
I like most the file versions which allow me to compare different config file versions
from inside of a file manager by using an Everything bookmark to get all files listed
nopath:exact:"D$ync Backup"

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

[...]
For now I am testing out

DSynchronize
[...]

It works but I already see in it some glitches / user-unfriendliness
[...]

I have switched to FreeFileSync / RealTimeSync - and unfortunately was faced with this profound issue: https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10431

In short: in order to secure my performed daily tiny updates of data in tag fields of audio files I cannot relay on detecting changes of their sizes, as their weight may stay the same; while I also cannot update date of modifications of those files, because my elaborate audio editing system must preserve the original ones. What I can do using FFS /RTS is to detect changes of content of whole files - but then the whole synchronization process can take hours and immediately drains my system resources to the point where I cannot listen to music or audio in a video without experiencing glitches

And so to workaround those caveats it seems that... I would need a program that compares hash values of whole folders, starting from the top most? Because if even one file that did not change its size or date but did change its tag data - then it would affect the hash value of the folder it is located in? And so a backup program would only need to compare the top most folder and eventually work it way down to the ones which is holding the files in which data was changes - hence resulting to a problematic file-by-file comparison in only few folders instead of all of them [which are thousand]?

[therube]

Maybe your tagging program can reset or set a file attribute, like the Archive attribute?

What about that?
If you clear (Archive) attribute, initially.
When you change a tag, date/time remains the same, file size may rename the same (so you can't "key in" on those), but does the Archive attribute set?

If so, then you "know" you only need to backup those file that do have the Archive attribute set (which your backup program unsets after having backed the file up).


Directory hash was mentioned in these parts before.

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

But assuming I will now clear all items on all of my drives from bearing that archive attribute, then edit tags in some audio files and as a result get this change detected [on the account of archive attribute added to them]- would not this work only for one edit of a file? Would I not after creating of each backup had to once more remove that attribute from every affected file- and which as a side affect would unnecessary use resources to replace the already synchronized thus backed-up files with a pseudo-newer version of them?

Maybe I will have to go back to using DSynchronize

[therube]

But assuming

No need to assume. Test it out. A single file will suffice.

Would I not after creating of each backup had to once more remove that attribute from every affected file

(which your backup program unsets after having backed the file up)

Both XCOPY & ROBOCOPY support automatically resetting the Archive attribute.

Code: Select all

  /M           Copies only files with the archive attribute set,
               turns off the archive attribute.

  /M :: copy only files with the Archive attribute and reset it.

FreeFileSync does not. Other GUI programs may.

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

[...]
Both XCOPY & ROBOCOPY support automatically resetting the Archive attribute.
[...]

That may be like so - but this would still get me [almost] nowhere, as I would have to do what / operate how? Periodically in some automatized way fire up a script which would perform copying [and silently overwriting] of all of files from the original location without the archive attribute. And because it would have to go thorough something like 7 000 000 items before finishing thus such amount of time would past that it would be wise to fire up another instance of this script and another and another - which would have a huge side effect of slowing down of my drives? Or alternatively I could just write a program that would create a database that would keep track of changes - which of course will never happen as I am not a programmer and have nearly zero skills required for creating of program like FreeFileSync / RealTimeSync


So it seems that

[...]
Maybe I will have to go back to using DSynchronize

indeed - or find some

[...]
Other GUI programs
[...]

[anmac1789]

Hello everyone, I would recommend TGRM's vice versa pro because it can detect which file exists in dual panel view and to see which of those files are newer or older or the same. THe only problem is that sometimes, it doesn't mark files and folders accurately. Sometimes, two files are the same with the same data and size and timestamps, but it marks it as different files. I would like this kind of directory tree view for everything, but it seems like I'm giving void alot of coding homework to do lol

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

But will this TGRMN ViceVersa PRO detect a difference in content between two audio files, if they have the exact same size and time stamp? I need a program that will somehow recognize two same looking audio files with tiny differences in tag data between them as being different files [and then act accordingly upon it]

[meteorquake]

If the TS-Size is not changing on updating the tags, if you can utilise the Archive flag to detect changed files or get it to poke the modified date on changing the tag I would, otherwise it will be a case of writing one, usually logging the MD5 against TS-Size in a database and spotting when a given TS-Size (or TS-Size-Name if preferable) has multiple MD5s, which would be slow i.e. very occasional for a complete computer scan, though improved if restricted just to certain file paths and types. In the case of tags being changed it may just have to be the MD5 of the first n bytes which will improve the speed even more...
d