Backing up to a local drive

Copying the delta to a local drive is better for files such at Outlook.pst. If Syncrify is using CPU for backing up to remote storage, then there would be little more overhead to copy the backup to a local drive as well as to remote storage. Surely having two backups (including your versions) in two different locations is basic good practice? Surprised an otherwise good backup software doesn't seem to support this. Anyone know of a product which will backup (incl versions) to a local drive and remote storage?

I agree with Michael. My client's application for this product would be backing up multiple video files which are dozens of gigabytes in size every night. Having a strictly incremental backup approach that only moves changed bytes would be useful. If this can't be done efficiently for local backups, then, like Vembu's Storegrid which has the same problem, then we'll have to look elsewhere.

Those of us dealing with large files with just a few bytes changing between backups, such as vmware disk images, cannot use xcopy because it would copy entire files when only a few bytes change and quickly exhaust backup space. By contrast, Syncrify, taking advantage of rsync's checksum-based differencing, minimizes the use of backup space, it's a very efficient way to store lots of versions of vmware disk images. And the only backup product that can do this, other than complex version-control software aimed at developers. Additionally, the bottleneck for modern computers is not CPU power, but it's disk access, making Syncrify faster than xcopy with the /D switch when backing up vmware disk images or other large files with few bytes changing between backups. If it's not too much work to completely remove the networking overhead and produce a version that does the rsync checksums and cutting up offline, you have a winner.

Using the /E switch rather than /S will get you any empty folders as well. Helpful if you are a software developer and want to retain structure. Cheers!