Hyper Backup - Remote NAS device vs rsync multi-version?

[Moonrise5999]

Hi all,

This is my first post, so apologies if I selected the wrong category or topic.

I have a question I haven't been able to get a answer on:what is the difference between using the 'remote NAS' option compared to the 'rsync - multi version' option in Hyper Backup?
I found a old thread on this forum, but the replies only mention the 'rsync - single version' option.

The reason I am asking this is pretty simple: a couple of years ago I had a really crappy internet connection and every backup task that used the 'Remote NAS' option failed due to bandwith and timeouts. After a while I tried creating a task of the exact same folder and settings but using the 'rsync - multi version' option and it was a lot more stable. Backup jobs failed every now and then, but much less often than before.

Fast forward to today. I have a much better internet connection, and I am wondering if there is any reason to try to switch my backup jobs back to the 'Remote NAS' option, since it is more integrated?

In case it matters: my main NAS is a DS920+ and the NAS I am backup up to is a DS418+. Both running the latest version of DSM 7.


Help is much appreciated!

 

[fredbert]

Welcome to the forum.

The 'remote NAS' option is to a Synology NAS that's running Hyper Backup Vault (HBV), whereas 'rsync' is any server that's running an rsync service. That means you could just use the 'rsync' with a Synology NAS too, if you've enabled it in Control Panel. The multi-version vault on the destination is the same either way, the only difference is the network service you used to create and maintain it.

With Hyper Backup Vault you can see what vaults are being maintained on that NAS, some info that's also available on the source NAS, plus a setting to limit the concurrent tasks.

Consider the rsync single/multi-version to be the rsync-y equivalents to the local folder task types, the transmission is different but the backup result is the same. Same holds for doing multi-version via HBV.

 

[Moonrise5999]

Thank you for your answer!

So, if I understand it correctly, there is no reason to pick rsync over HBV other than the statistics on the remote NAS device?
The NAS I am backing up to has only 1 purpose: serving as a off-site backup for my main NAS, so statistics aren't that useful.

Do you also have any idea why the backup tasks with HBV were failing but rsync works fine?
I have a VPN tunnel going between the routers on both networks, enabled transfer encryption and client side encryption is also enabled.


The main reason I am considering going back to HBV is because it is more integrated. That gives me (hopefully) better security, especially in the long-term of DSM will not be updated anymore on the DS418+ but the HBV package will continue to get updates. Does this reasoning make any sense or will it just cause a lot of hassle without any reason?

Also, one last question: can I, if I decide to switch to HBV, re-link my existing backups (with version database) that I made with rsync, since they are both in *.hbk formats?

 

[Telos]

the HBV package will continue to get updates

HB/HBV updates are tied to the underlying DSM and may not be available unless your DSM is current. For example, Hyper Backup 4.1.0 requires DSM 7.2 and above.