21–30 of 119 posts
It wasn't perfect, but it did protect against some scenarios in which a device could be majorly messed up, yet the server was more resistant to losing the data.
For work, the backup schemes include separate additional protection of the data server or media, so append-only added to that would be nice, as redundant protection, but not as necessary.
Is that a big deal? You should probably be doing this with zfs immutable snapshots anyway. Or equivalent feature for your filesystem.
There's not much sense in using these advanced backup tools if you're already on ZFS, even if it's just on the backup server, I would stick with something simpler. Their whole point is in reliable checksums, incremental backups, deduplication, snapshotting on top of a 'simple' classical filesystem. Sounds familiar to any ZFS user?
Would be interested to know what others have set up as I'm not really happy with how I do it. I have zfs on my NAS running locally. I backup to that from my PC via rsync triggered by anacron daily. From my NAS I use rclone to send encrypted backups to Backblaze.
I'd be happier with something more frequent from PC to NAS. Syncthing maybe? Then just do zfs sync to some off site zfs server.
Borg vs Restic vs Kopia ? They are so similar in features. How do they compare? Which to choose?
All three have a lot of commands to work with repositories. Each one of them is much better than closed source proprietary backup software that I have dealt with, like Synology hyperbackup nonsense.
If you want a better solution, the next level is ZFS.
This should be simpler still:
I even wrote python scripts to automatically cleanup and unmount if something goes wrong (not enough space etc). On openbsd I can even Double encrypt with blowfish(vnconfig -K) and then a diff alg for bioctl.
I've been using Borg for a while, I've been thinking about looking at the backup utility space again to see what is out there. What backup utilities do you all use and recommend?
Kopia
Borg vs Restic vs Kopia ? They are so similar in features. How do they compare? Which to choose?
The fact that Kopia has a UI is awesome for non-technical users.
I migrated off restic due to memory usage, to Kopia. I am currently debating switching back to restic purely because of how retention works.
Borg vs Restic vs Kopia ? They are so similar in features. How do they compare? Which to choose?
I was setting up PCs for unsophisticated users who needed to be able to do their own restores. Most OSS choices are only appropriate for technical users, and some like Borg are *nix-only.
Borg vs Restic vs Kopia ? They are so similar in features. How do they compare? Which to choose?
Restic is the winner. It talks directly to many backends, is a static binary (so you can drop the executable in operating systems which don’t allow package installation like a NAS OS) and has a clean CLI. Kopia is a bit newer and less tested. All three have a lot of commands to work with repositories. Each one of them is much better than closed source proprietary backup software that I have dealt with, like Synology…
It seems the suggested solution is to use server credentials that lack delete permissions (and use credentials that have delete for compacting the repo), but does that protect against a compromised client simply overriding files without deleting them?