#Synology drive sync vs backup full
#Synology drive sync vs backup windows

#Synology drive sync vs backup windows

No aggressive CPU usage and both windows and the NAS don't need anything additional installed.

It works well and tbh I am not sure why I didn't use it before. This allows a drive to be mapped to an SMB, appearing in windows as a drive, with the added benefit if the SMB is not available, then the files are both still available and folders can be saved to with syncing resuming when the connection is restored. No alert to tell me there was any issue.įollowing this I have resorted to using Windows Sync Centre. So my local and NAS were totally out of whack. This then put me in a situation where I had no idea which files had been saved / edited and which were not.

#Synology drive sync vs backup full

This appeared to work fine, showing a full resync, however discovered to my dismay that the files were not actually syncing, rather just showing as synced. This seems to be an ongoing issue with drive and one thats not solved with updates.įollowing a format I tried to re sync a folder that was already on my drive. Cloud drives do not need to do this, unless they detect a change. I managed to improved this by disabling advance integrity checks but still far from ideal. This typically takes hours and cannot understand the need for it. This uses CPU and drive access (significant amounts), and generally I have 40,000 files which even if they are only placeholders only need syncing, every boot. There are however some issues:ĭrive takes a long time at boot, and every boot to sync (90% CPU usage) I have lots of files on the NAS I would like to access on an adhoc basis, and being able to do this without accessing the SMB share is a godsend. The ability to be able to sync files to the NAS in a 'Onedrive' like manner, and even with the prospect of on demand access (to save space) is one I relish. The principle of synology drive is fantastic.