Good thinking! I hadn’t considered that, but I don’t think it will be a huge problem long term. Definitely on the initial re-upload, I’ll want to do it in chunks and clear temp, rather than attempting to upload all 2TB at once. But after the initial upload, I think regular sync shouldn’t be a huge problem with extra space.
And yeah, I hear ya, I wouldn’t be running a comparison based on “content” frequently but it’s nice to know that it works without issue if and when needed. “Size and time” seems to do the basics just fine.
Here’s more info about how RealTimeSync (part of FreeFileSync) works: FreeFileSync . I think you can technically have it do just about anything when it detects changes to a monitored directory, but the default is to run a freefilesync batch job. So that being the case, it would pick up any changes made even when it wasn’t running, but only once it’s triggered by another change in the directory being monitored when it is open. Because from there on out it’s just a standard FFS sync based on whatever parameters you’ve set. Just saves the user a step and triggers the job for you.
Ah, right. That is indeed better than Icedrive’s behaviour, albeit not perfect as you say. For further peace of mind one could perhaps add a “scheduled batch job” that scans everything, say, once a day.
Anyway, I think I will just go with the sync pairs for now, combined with occasional “manual” checks using FreeFileSync. Let’s see how that goes…
That baffles me as well. So far, the Icedrive team has shown no concern at all for issues that lead to incomplete backups. It’s hard to conclude anything else than that they just don’t care about our data.
Maybe I’m being naive here, but I think we should give them the next version or two to sort this out.
I just have this fantasy that their radio silence indicates focus. To be fair, they did indicate that they’d noted the demand for the timed syncing before this thread.
While I’m on this thread, though, can I ask what advantages FFS gives over Syncback? The reason I ask is that I already have the latter installed, so I’d like to use the same tool if possible. I simply haven’t had time to evaluate FFS yet, but I see some encouraging posts here, so it’s definitely on my radar. It’s just that I’ve been using Syncback for years, so I’m used to it.
I hope you are right! In the meantime, however, I would expect them to warn users about this shortcoming in the software. A simple email to all users would suffice. Or a warning in the app that pops up when you try to close it. Or something about it on their website. But strangely, they do none of that, as if they try to hide the problem instead of being transparent about it.
I wouldn’t know. I picked FreeFileSync more or less at random, being a free and decent looking app. Quite possible that Syncback does the job as well. Let us know if you give it a try!
It’s hard to conclude anything else than that they just don’t care about our data.
Agreed. Which, given the industry they’re in, is a wee bit problematic.
Alternate take: Maybe it’s just an extra layer of security, end-to-end-to-end encryption if you will. Where the final “-to-end” is plausible deniability of whether you ever actually had any data backed up in the first place. It’s Schrodinger’s data, if you will. It exists in a quantum superposition of backed up and not backed up until it is observed. If this is the case, their commitment to privacy in this regard is truly unparalleled.
@lawgiver_ai I love your optimism. Unfortunately, I don’t share it. I would be a lot more optimistic if this was the first time around. But I and many other lifetime users have been giving them “the next version or two to sort this out” for YEARS. Again, I think they are good folks who are trying to do their best, but they just can’t seem to stop screwing the pooch on sync. It has NEVER worked well, and since 2.70, there have been consistent regressions in functionality of sync in literally every single release since. (I would cite sources for that, but their changelogs barely exist and only came into existence after continued user pressure through conversations like this, and even now that they exist, seem to be an afterthought at best.) For over a year, they replied to every complaint or issue about sync with “this will all be fixed in version 3.” Version 3 is here, and here we are having these conversations. I’ve been a lifetime user for 4 years, always waiting for them to sort it out in the next version. At this point, it’s not worth any more energy. They seem to have gotten the “mount” feature solid, so I say we lean into their strengths. I’m going to treat that as the only feature of the software, use third party apps to bridge the gap in the failures of the icedrive team to EVER create a functional sync, and take back the rest of my time. I’m spreading my crappy attitude to the masses on this forum to hopefully help others do the same – keep more of their time and lean into the only part of the program that works as intended, while giving up on any expectations further development of a side of the app that they have continually gaslit users about for 4 solid years. Add to the fact that the team only seems to be a handful of dudes who, I’m guessing might have other jobs, and that they have now spread their resources even more thin with iceVPN, and that they have been aware of these issues for months and not fixed them yet, and… yeah, “abandon all hope” is my best suggestion.
As for your question about freefilesync vs syncback, I don’t know of any significant difference. If syncback does what you need it to do, great. I like FFS but haven’t tried other software either. The main advantage of freefilesync for me is that when I use it, I get to say “FFS!!!” which mirrors exactly how I feel about having to use it to patch up the deficiencies of a paid product.
@tambo - I have to admit my optimism is getting a bit dented as the wait gets longer. I was just trying to give the benefit of the doubt and some time for them to fix things. When I wrote that, I thought the silence could be interpreted to mean that they were focussing on taking all this feedback on board. But now we see the release of IceVPN, which means they were working on that instead.
So now I don’t know. There’s something someone else wrote, on a related thread; the sentiment that we users were acting in good faith by providing feedback (and putting in work to do so), only to be met with a shrug of the shoulders. That’s been going round in my head for a while.
I’m a software developer, myself, so I can sympathise with the workflow and I can imagine an environment of competing priorities and distractions from management, etc. But surely someone of influence in IceDrive has seen this thread by now? I’d have parked IceVPN and fixed this issue first. But that’s me.
Right now I’m getting a bit jaded.
BTW - I also noticed the FFS acronym! I’ll stick with SyncBack for now, as I’m used to it. I haven’t tried it on IceDrive yet, but I’ll set up a manual backup soon and see how it goes.
