Before posting, and to avoid disappointment, please read the following:

  • This forum is not for 2BrightSparks to provide technical support. It's primarily for users to help other users. Do not expect 2BrightSparks to answer any question posted to this forum.
  • If you find a bug in any of our software, please submit a support ticket. It does not matter if you are using our freeware, a beta version or you haven't yet purchased the software. We want to know about any and all bugs so we can fix them as soon as possible. We usually need more information and details from you to reproduce bugs and that is better done via a support ticket and not this forum.

Latest Syncback pro trial, very slow backup to Amazon drive

For technical support visit https://support.2brightsparks.com/
Post Reply
telljcl
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:33 am

Latest Syncback pro trial, very slow backup to Amazon drive

Post by telljcl »

I set up a simple mirror from local SSD to Amazon cloud account, and it looks like around 3-500 k/s is about average throughput.

This is for backing up tens of thousands of .jpg or .arw files, and this will take way too long - not viable.

Amazon's native Windows 10 app for backup to their servers is MUCH faster (although not configurable as a mirror).

Anything I should know?

Windows 10 64b, 20mbps upload connection, reading from a SSD local drive.

Thanks
telljcl
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:33 am

Re: Latest Syncback pro trial, very slow backup to Amazon drive

Post by telljcl »

telljcl wrote: ā†‘
Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:38 am
I set up a simple mirror from local SSD to Amazon cloud account, and it looks like around 3-500 k/s is about average throughput.

This is for backing up tens of thousands of .jpg or .arw files, and this will take way too long - not viable.

Amazon's native Windows 10 app for backup to their servers is MUCH faster (although not configurable as a mirror).

Anything I should know?

Windows 10 64b, 20mbps upload connection, reading from a SSD local drive.

Thanks
Don't see that I can edit this post, but apparently this is "normal", based on the below link provided in another thread.

I failed to mention that the slow performance was on an original backup (no file version checking - just straight copy throughput, after all decisions as to what needs to be copied are made). The scanning is pretty slow also, but workable. It's the throughput that is unusable.

I'll try Dropbox....

Thanks
Post Reply