You are in error in your posting – as others have posted here, the share order is source then destination.
The job-name field can be deleted if you issue the command from the command line. . It’s part of the GUI interface to track the progress of the backup, and is not part of any documented rsync command I know.
The safest way to do this operation is to start a backup from the GUI. If you suspect it will fail, log in v ia ssh, and execute the command ‘ps -ef | grep rsync’. You will see one or more instances of the rsync command the GUI generated on your behalf. Copy the text of that command to someplace safe, terminate the backup job as issued from the GUI, then return to ssh and paste the command you copied to the command line. Edit out the --timeout, and execute the command. You may want to try sticking a ‘&’ at the end to background the job – this would allow you to log out of ssh and theoretically leave the job running. I haven’t tried this yet.
That way you are emulating as closely as possible the actions of the device as delivered, and not just going at things from scratch in some pseudo-emporical way that will most likely lead you to shoot yourself in the foot.
You’re not alone in wanting to do this – the WD second-level assigned to me on an escalation basis after I posted here did it too. When hw permitted me to run rsync from the command line, he told me how to do it from scratch, in a way that would not have been compatible with what the device does itself. This is not the first time I’ve seen customer service drive the customer down a wrong path, which is why I insist on transparency, especially when it comes to my data.
As a result of my posting here, I did finally get another reply back from the second-level who responded when I posted the first time. He took credit for telling me the solution (when he didn’t – see above), and graciously ‘allowed’ me to either continue using the command-line solution I had worked out, or offered to give me my money back (oh yeah, right, after spending *weeks* copying files over). He told me that engineering was working on a fix, but that there was no ETA in sight. What are they doing, hoping to meditate the problem away?
Not a lot of value-add going on with support – but at least they didn’t insist on maintaining a boundary that would have blocked a workaround. I had to call several times when I first got the device, and key information needed to operate it is not in the user manual, and not evident from the GUI. It’s time for some rethinking, in my opinion. But exposing the underlying Linux was a good move towards preserving transparency.