I know, it's pretty much a newbie question, but I've always wondered (though never tested): what is faster, a 'standard' backup or mirror?
or better:
does a mirror first check whether or not the files exist on destination and if so, whether they are newer or the same, so only newer files are being copied or does mirror copy all, no matter whether identical files exist on destination, which obviously takes more time.
Personally.. whilst not being sure whether or not it is the best way to go, I have always used mirror.
Background is that often I rename files and subsequently move them to other sub folders (named after a subject)
To avoid duplicates the backup profile would then include deleting files when they do not exist on destination, being more or less similar to a mirror profile (from my non-expert point of view).
Thanks.
or better:
does a mirror first check whether or not the files exist on destination and if so, whether they are newer or the same, so only newer files are being copied or does mirror copy all, no matter whether identical files exist on destination, which obviously takes more time.
Personally.. whilst not being sure whether or not it is the best way to go, I have always used mirror.
Background is that often I rename files and subsequently move them to other sub folders (named after a subject)
To avoid duplicates the backup profile would then include deleting files when they do not exist on destination, being more or less similar to a mirror profile (from my non-expert point of view).
Thanks.
Statistics: Posted by sbwul — Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:00 am