SyncBack SE

[Handruin]

Anyone ever try SyncBack SE? I'm going to evaluate it shortly, but I thought I'd ask. Looks like a decent tool that can be scheduled to backup files, even if you're not logged into your PC.

 

[Handruin]

Answered my own question...looks like mubs recommends it. 8)

 

[mubs]

Yup, pretty solid. The free stuff is adequate for me, so never tried the SE version. IIRC, you are the one that made a post about it (when you were looking for a similar tool); that's how I heard about it and started to use it.

 

[mubs]

Just noticed your sig. Yeooow!

 

[Handruin]

Yup, pretty solid. The free stuff is adequate for me, so never tried the SE version. IIRC, you are the one that made a post about it (when you were looking for a similar tool); that's how I heard about it and started to use it.

I searched through the topics, and I've only mentioned 2nd copy. I found two topics where you mentioned SyncBack. It was time who enlightened me that 2nd copy won't run as a service. It seems as though SyncBack SE will work if the user is not logged on, but not technically as a service.

I'm using the 15 day trial, and so far it works well. I'm copying over to my samba setup, and no problems yet. I like how you can generate a list of files on the destination drive that have been removed from the source. I know you can do 100% synchronizing, but that leaves me with an uneasy feeling. If I delete something on the source by accident...it will be gone on the destination. Having the option to delete by my own discretion is very handy (it generates a handy diff list).

 

[time]

I tried Syncback and a couple of alternatives back in March, quite possibly because mubs mentioned it. Syncback relies on the Windows Task Scheduler to run without requiring a logged in user. You can do that yourself with any program, although Syncback semi-automates the process. If you are logged in and want to check the status of a scheduled backup, I believe the program can only provide limited information - but it's a while since I looked at it and mubs might know more.

I found Cobian Backup better met my requirements. If you compare the features, you'll notice it is more powerful (unless you want to backup open files, which I don't). It also runs as a service and you can query the status of any backup job at any time, even remotely. Finally, unlike Syncback, it's 100% free.

If you get to try both Doug, I'd be interested in your comments.

 

[time]

I should also point out that I have enough confidence in Cobian to have deployed it on client sites.

 

[Mercutio]

What do these programs do that ntbackup/Backup Exec or just a well written batch file doesn't?

 

[mubs]

I know you can do 100% synchronizing, but that leaves me with an uneasy feeling. If I delete something on the source by accident...it will be gone on the destination.

Not true. There are options to :

a) produce a "mirror-image" in the destination, which means if you delete something in the source, Syncback will delete the same thing in the destination (what you're afraid of). IIRC, Syncback calls this "sync"

b) make a "backup". In this mode, Syncback will leave alone files/folders in the destination that are not present in the source. This would address your concerns.

Time: I certainly am no expert in Syncback!

Merc: No idea.

 

[Handruin]

I tried Syncback and a couple of alternatives back in March, quite possibly because mubs mentioned it. Syncback relies on the Windows Task Scheduler to run without requiring a logged in user. You can do that yourself with any program, although Syncback semi-automates the process. If you are logged in and want to check the status of a scheduled backup, I believe the program can only provide limited information - but it's a while since I looked at it and mubs might know more.

I found Cobian Backup better met my requirements. If you compare the features, you'll notice it is more powerful (unless you want to backup open files, which I don't). It also runs as a service and you can query the status of any backup job at any time, even remotely. Finally, unlike Syncback, it's 100% free.

If you get to try both Doug, I'd be interested in your comments.

I tried Cobian Backup (because you recommended it) and I never got it to work quite right for me. Let me download the current version tonight and give it a good eval. I remember having problems with scheduling backups to a network mounted drive letter...I may have been doing this incorrectly, so it deserves another chance.

 

[Handruin]

What do these programs do that ntbackup/Backup Exec or just a well written batch file doesn't?

Does NT backup leave the files as-is? Last I remember it created some type of container file. Backup Exec is $795...is there a consumer level version I'm missing?

Well writtne batch file used to work, but I want a way to schedule, and manage differences in a nice utility. I'm finding that I occasionally clean house and delete files from my source...it's a PITA to wipe out entire folders and then resynch just to have the correct files. It may very-well be that me backup strategy is fubar'ed.

 

[Handruin]

I know you can do 100% synchronizing, but that leaves me with an uneasy feeling. If I delete something on the source by accident...it will be gone on the destination.

Not true. There are options to :

a) produce a "mirror-image" in the destination, which means if you delete something in the source, Syncback will delete the same thing in the destination (what you're afraid of). IIRC, Syncback calls this "sync"

b) make a "backup". In this mode, Syncback will leave alone files/folders in the destination that are not present in the source. This would address your concerns.

Time: I certainly am no expert in Syncback!

Merc: No idea.

Right now I'm using your option "b" as described in your post. The point I was trying to make is that while using this backup option, SyncBack allows me to see the differences between my source and destination drive, and then easily delete from the removed source files from the destination at my discretion (which I like).

 

[Mercutio]

Yes, NTbackup makes .bkf files. Tar makes .tbz files, but both work very well other than that. 'nix machines also have rsync, and someone has probably released a cygwin version of that.

I really can't think of anything that I can't make the plain old Windows task scheduler + a batch file that uses xcopy do. Guess I'll have to download it and have a look.

 

[P5-133XL]

Just because you can do it, does not mean that there aren't better easier ways...

 

[Mercutio]

I rolled my own backup/syncing system for myself some time ago, but it's held up and actually scaled very well to the volume of data that I normally deal with.

 

[Handruin]

I tried Syncback and a couple of alternatives back in March, quite possibly because mubs mentioned it. Syncback relies on the Windows Task Scheduler to run without requiring a logged in user. You can do that yourself with any program, although Syncback semi-automates the process. If you are logged in and want to check the status of a scheduled backup, I believe the program can only provide limited information - but it's a while since I looked at it and mubs might know more.

I found Cobian Backup better met my requirements. If you compare the features, you'll notice it is more powerful (unless you want to backup open files, which I don't). It also runs as a service and you can query the status of any backup job at any time, even remotely. Finally, unlike Syncback, it's 100% free.

If you get to try both Doug, I'd be interested in your comments.

I must be doing something wrong with cobain backup. I cannot get the tasks to copy my files. The task starts and then almost immeditaly stops.

Cobain is configured as a service. I've tried using my normal logon account, and also a new account, but neither made any sort of difference.

This is all the log file tells me:

!! 9/17/2005 1:48:01 AM The directory "H:\mirrored_backup\" could not be created
    9/17/2005 1:48:01 AM ******** Backup for "Mirrored_backup files" ended. Elapsed time: 00:00:01 ********
    9/17/2005 1:48:01 AM Number of backed up files for "Mirrored_backup files": 0
!!! 9/17/2005 1:48:01 AM There are errors for "Mirrored_backup files": 1

Note that I'm trying to connect to a network drive and my task is a full backup with no zip compression. The network drive is a samba share which requires a username and password. The task I'm trying to run is being tested while I'm logged in with this account, and the share drive is accessible & writable (with 70+GB of free space).

 

[time]

Drive letters are assigned on a per user-session basis. Logical drive mappings just don't exist for services such as the Cobian engine; you need to use UNC (eg. '\\server\share').

You have exactly the same issue with anything launched from the Windows Task Scheduler.

I'm fairly sure that's in the doco somewhere, Doug.

 

[Bozo]

Have you tried this
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...54-c975-4814-9649-cce41af06eb7&DisplayLang=en

Bozo :mrgrn:

 

[mubs]

I've read good things about SyncToy as well (the one Bozo linked).

 

[time]

1. Mubs, SyncToy requires Dot Net.
2. Even though M$ specifies XP, it will run on Win2k.
3. You need a 'validated' copy of XP to download it.
4. When I downloaded it with Firefox, I followed the steps and faithfully entered the code, only for M$.com to inform me at the last hurdle that my browser didn't support Active-X. :evil:
5. It's cute and it's free.
6. It has only basic functionality - Xcopy with a preview. It doesn't begin to replace any of the commercial products I've seen.

 

[mubs]

Thanks, time. I think I'll stick with Syncback for now.

 

[Handruin]

Drive letters are assigned on a per user-session basis. Logical drive mappings just don't exist for services such as the Cobian engine; you need to use UNC (eg. '\\server\share').

You have exactly the same issue with anything launched from the Windows Task Scheduler.

I'm fairly sure that's in the doco somewhere, Doug.

Thanks for the tip. I needed to change the service back to using my local account name, and then I entered the path as UNC and now it works. Thanks for setting me straight.

 

[Bozo]

I bet to differ as far as Synctoy goes. I'm only testing it now but so far it's working great.
One of the things I like is if you delete a file/folder on one computer, Synctoy doesn't delete it on the 'mate' computer but puts it in the Recycle Bin. If you do an 'opps' you can recover.
I also like the way it works going both ways. Just like file replication in server. No matter where the the file is added, deleted or modified, synctoy will make both computers the same.
It will also rename files. If you rename a file on computer A, synctoy will rename the file in computer B.
You can have synctoy do file replication or do a 'master/slave' setup going either way. And it only has to be installed on one of the computers.

Bozo
:mrgrn:

 

[time]

Sorry, I was a little too cavalier in my summary.

Network drives don't have a recycle bin. Doesn't this mean that while the local copy gets saved, the remote copy gets killed? (I haven't tried it).

I forgot about the renaming feature, but I'm not sure how useful that's going to be. Windows already drives me up the wall when it tries to guess this sort of stuff.

My understanding is that it works solely off file dates. I'm currently looking for something that keeps a database of file details, so that it can alert you when a file changes at both ends. (Actually, it could probably get away with just remembering the snapshot date, but additions like CRC would be nice).

 

[Bozo]

I'm still testing but I believe synctoy uses the metadata of the file.
I have made changes to a file and synctoy copied the file to the other test computer although the date was the same. (at least the date you could see in explorer)
I'm setting up a recycle bin test now.

Bozo :mrgrn:

 

[time]

You can turn on an option to compare file contents instead of just file dates, but obviously it's slower.

I was able to fool it easily by changing the timestamp and nothing else. To be fair, that fools nearly all of these programs, but it's a not uncommon situation. Also like most programs, it doesn't recognize that a file has been changed at both ends.

For a free product, it's great, and I'll probably find a use for it. It's just that I've been looking for more sophisticated solutions.

 

[time]

Speaking of more sophisticated solutions, I found two affordable ones that are able to detect update conflicts (there was a truly powerful one that could tell you exactly what had changed in any Office document, but the $400 price tag for one user left me a little breathless).

One is ViceVersa. It's okay but a little clunky and slow to calculate CRCs.

The other is Continuity@work from Mobiliti. It's fast and handles conflicts, as well as being smart enough to compare file contents if dates don't match. There's also a variant that I found to be a superior alternative to Windows offline folders.

Mobiliti has a 75% discount during September, making their products $15 and $20 respectively. Worth a try for anyone who needs to stop users getting into trouble with synchronization issues.

 

[Bozo]

You might also download Server 2003 Resource Kit (it's free) and extract 'Robocopy'. It will run on NT 4.0 and above.

Looks impressive although I have not tried it.

Bozo :mrgrn:

 

[Handruin]

Robocopy works very well. It also came with the win2k resource kit, so I've been using it for years on my work machines.

The two drawbacks I find are a non-visual interface (call me cheesy, it's what I want), and no inherent scheduling service. I want something to run in the background all the time and execute when scheduled.

Otherwise I have no complaints with robocopy, it's been working perfect for years in the lab at my work.