syncthing-android VS Rdiff-backup

We use syncthing to share files between our machines. It avoids is having to use dropbox / OneDrive etc. You just choose a folder and it automatically syncs it in the background.

https://syncthing.net/

This very hn entries is bust contradicting your statement.

Also what about syncthing[1] (for recurrent/permanent sync) and croc[2] (for one time copies) ?

I have used both for a number of years already.

[1] https://syncthing.net/

[2] https://github.com/schollz/croc

I would use syncthing, which is open source at https://syncthing.net/.

After minimal setup, it just works(tm).

You have a normal directory in your filesystem, that is synced to the other peers (which you set up in the "minimal setup").

I have been using it for years, and it works well. It has no problems crossing os'es (i.e. windows -> linux, linux -> mac)

For windows I usually recommend https://github.com/canton7/SyncTrayzor, but vanilla syncthing works fine too (but don't try to mix them!)

Do consider Syncthing particularly if you are using Android. If using apple iOS you'd need the möbius sync client.

https://syncthing.net/

https://www.mobiussync.com/

One thing that it beats the cloud / centralized sync on is because the connection is direct between devices when the initial transfer is completed the file is completely there on the other device. With a cloud type of sync you do the transfer twice. I've seen stack up on large media or with the structure of cloud services pricing making it expensive depending on how your workflow is setup with inside and outside parties. For example, Dropbox deduction from all parties' storage limits not just the sharer.

You can also point Syncthing at a local sync of Dropbox or Google drive and then forward the files to other recipients from that for some purposes.

I think sync is a non-feature, as you can just ride on your existing solution.

For example, I use syncthing [1] with Obsidian to sync files off-cloud.

https://syncthing.net/

When I was 14 and just getting started, I used Notepad. Upgraded to Wordpad when I realized I loved putting italics in every other sentence, moved to Google Docs at around 25 when I started writing on my phone and wanted to sync with my computer, finally moved to Obsidian a few months ago (with Syncthing for syncing) when I decided I don't want to live in Google's house where they can burn my stuff down whenever they want.

Pick it up again an use cloud syncing this time! Is worth! https://syncthing.net/

For starters it has a tendency to paint itself into a corner on ENOSPC situations. You won't even be able to perform a restore if a backup was started but unfinished because it ran out of space. There's this process of "regressing" the repo [0] which must occur before you can do practically anything after an interrupted/failed backup. What this actually must do is undo the partial forward progress, by performing what's effectively a restore of the files that got pushed into the future relative to the rest of the repository, which requires more space. Unless you have/can create free space to do these things, it can become wedged... and if it's a dedicated backup system where you've intentionally filled disks up with restore points, you can find yourself having to throw out backups just to make things functional again - even ability to restore is affected.

That's the most obvious glaring problem, beyond that it's just kind of garbage in terms of the amount of space and time it requires to perform restores. Especially restores of files having many reverse-differential increments leading back to the desired restore point. It can require 2X the file's size in spare space to assemble the desired version, while it iteratively reconstructs all the intermediate versions in arriving at the desired version. Unless someone fixed this since I last had to deal with it, which is possible.

Source: Ages ago I worked for a startup[1] that shipped a backup appliance originally implemented by contractors using rdiff-backup. Writing a replacement that didn't suck but was compatible with rdiff-backup's repos consumed several years of my life...

There are far better options in 2024.

[0] https://github.com/rdiff-backup/rdiff-backup/blob/master/src...

[1] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/axcient

and that should install the latest version, rdiff-backup-2.2.4-2.el8.x86_64.rpm. This is all described in the rdiff-backup README file.

Rdiff-backup - close to what you do currently but at least provides versioning. Based on rsync

as in just a copy of your files? This I would barely consider a backup, more of just a mirror from a point in time. What're you missing by doing this? versions of files, deduplication, and encryption (last one being very important for the best kind of backups, which should be off-site). Just because it's not files doesn't mean it's proprietary. Proprietary would mean secret and undocumented. There are many great options. Borg is my favorite but Kopia is probably better if you use windows, urbackup is an option if you want centralized management of backups and rdiff-backup is if you want something kinda what you have currently but adding versioning but lacks deduplication and encryption.

If you're comfortable with the cli and you want to have your backup in a plain file format with some incremental backups, there's rdiffbackup. It uses rsync under the hood and has worked quite well for me.

Rdiff Backup - Reverse differential backups that uses rsync, linking, and can tunnel via ssh. You get a full current backup with increments available to restore any version of the file with minimal storage space used.

borg is great. we've been using it for the past 3 years to archive hundreds of file-level backups of servers, database dumps and VM images. average size of each borg repo is few GB but there are few outliers up to few hundreds of GB.

borg replaced https://rdiff-backup.net/ for us and gave:

Robocopy is great if you don't have access to rsync. If rsync via WSL2 for instance is an option, I'd personally go with rdiffbackup.