61–70 of 194 posts
As an Arq user, this makes me happy, as Arq is not exactly known for being fast. The announcement doesn't say, but I'm hoping they have reduced the amount of space needed for the client-side cache (currently 18GB (!) on my laptop).
How is this, from a technical point of view, more advanced than running rsync in a regular fashion (with hardlinks to keep cheap snapshots)? Just wondering about the technical aspects.
It's also versioned backup, like Time Machine. Not just a clone of the latest.
Have a look at the `--link-dest` option to rsync.
What compression was used before Arq 5? lz4 is super fast, but not particularly space-efficient compared to some slower compression algorithms. Since Arq customers are the ones paying the storage bills, this doesn't seem like an entirely costless decision--Arq is now faster, but you should expect your storage bills to go up a bit due to the lower compression. I use Borg backup with lz4 compression, so I definitely do…
How is this, from a technical point of view, more advanced than running rsync in a regular fashion (with hardlinks to keep cheap snapshots)? Just wondering about the technical aspects.
One differentiating factor is that rsync doesn't work with storage services like Amazon S3, Glacier, Google Drive, and the like.
Awesome, can't wait to upgrade tonight! Any news on the Linux / CLI version?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tried to purchase, but it sends me to a bad URL: $ host store.arqbackup.com Host store.arqbackup.com not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
Sorry about that. Should work now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One differentiating factor is that rsync doesn't work with storage services like Amazon S3, Glacier, Google Drive, and the like.
which is a good thing. if a few years ago somebody said "just copy all your private data to some place on the internet... but encrypt it first" you would take it for the crazy argument it is.