Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

haystacksoftware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 103 posts

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#21

Post by relix »

tunesmith wrote: post #17

I've regularly been curious about this, but Crashplan has a stable reputation and seems much less expensive for large backups. For those who have researched Crashplan, why did you choose Arq instead?

I'm using Crashplan now but when my subscription runs out I will switch to Arq+AWS Glacier. I'm currently around the 300GB mark for backup space. Using glacier this would cost me $3/month, about $36/year or half as much as I'm paying for Crashplan ($60 with a discount).

Even if it was more expensive for me, I would still switch, because I don't trust Crashplan completely. There have been stories from users of backups getting corrupted when they needed to recover, and the upload speed to Crashplan is so slow it took months for the full 300GB to upload (I'm getting around 0.5 - 2Mbps up on my 100Mbps/100Mbps connection, I believe they are artificially throttling it to discourage people from storing a ton of data). This means new data takes a long time to be 100% safe, especially when for example I dump my camera's memory to disk.

On top of that, if their upload speed is this low, their download speed probably is, too. If my data crashes, I need the backup yesterday. I can't wait a week to download the 300GB at 10Mbps.

I believe Amazon's speeds would be much higher.

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#22

Post by leejoramo »

OWaz wrote: post #13
leejoramo wrote: post #2

Arq has been part of my backup systems since version 2. This upgrade looks very good. Especially the expansion beyond relying solely on Amazon S3 and use number of other services including SSH. Having used the past Glacier support, the new S3 Glacier Lifecycle will be much better. I am wondering about when (if?) the open source arq_restore and format documentation will be updated.

Do you mind elaborating what your total backup solution is? I've been looking at Arq but am not aware of what it does not do and what I would need to fill in the gaps. Currently I rely on time machine backing up to three different drives and keeping one of those drives in the office.

I will ignore what I do for server backups, and I will focus on my MacBook. I run my web development business and my personal life off of this system.

The software I use: CrashPlan, Arq, DropBox, Carbon Copy Cloner.

CrashPlan: I have backing up my data, configuration /Users, /Library. I have a bunch of regex restrictions to not backup various files such as caches, VMWare images, etc. Crashplan backups up to their cloud servers every 15 minutes. When I am at home (where I work from) it also backups to a local copy of CrashPlan on a server.

Arq: I am doing daily backups to Arq. These are now being done to Glacier for long term / last resort backups. This only backups my /Users with heavy restrictions on which files.

DropBox: I have many of my documents stored in Dropbox with the PackRat feature to keep copies of every version and deletion. I don't consider DropBox to be backup by itself, but I often find it is much faster to find and restore something via Dropbox than other methods. I also take care about the types of data I put on Dropbox.

Carbon Copy Cloner: as I mentioned in another part of this thread, I think SuperDuper is better for most people. However, I do use CCC's ability to remotely do a boot able bare metal backup to my home office server. When I travel, I typically take an external backup drive with a current mirror of my system.

I don't use Apple's Time Machine. I think it is a good choice for most home users. As Apple has added more features to Time Machine, I do think about adding it to my mix.

That covers most things. I do have somethings under SVN or Git which could be considered another layer of backup.

Currently, the biggest pain point for me in backups is VMWare images. I currently have 4 Linux and 3 Windows images on this system, and they can cause a huge amount of data needing to be backed up every time they are used.

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#23

Post by jnsaff2 »

chimeracoder wrote: post #11

Pretty awesome to see this. When I used a Mac for work, I used Arq and set it up on my coworkers' computers (they were completely non-technical). It was very easy to use. I'm curious what backup tools people use on Linux if they want to back up files on Glacier. I use git-annex[0] for certain files (it works well for pictures and media). The rest of my backup process is a fairly rudimentary (though effective) rsync s…

http://duply.net/ no gui but fairly easy to set up.

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#24

Post by leejoramo »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #15
leejoramo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arq does not have bootable backups. It is primarily for long term off site versioned backups. Look at SuperDuper or CCC for a full metal bootable backup. I generally prefer SuperDuper for its simplicity, and recommend it to most people. CCC is not really harder to use, but presents a bunch more options which most people don't need and with which they may get into trouble. One great feature of CCC is the ability to do…

I pine for a Mac backup service that would let me backup from anywhere, and in the event of failure, I could fire up a new Mac, point it at the service, and boot to restore all over the net.

The problem with bootable backups is that you need root access to do the types of low level disk writing required. Thus, you need a very trusted environment.

That said, you can also use CCC and SuperDuper to backup to a disk image file. This would not be directly bootable, but it can be copied to a new hard drive which would then be bootable. Backing up to remote disk images is much slower than the root method to drive method.

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#25

Post by archagon »

relix wrote: post #21
tunesmith wrote: post #17

I've regularly been curious about this, but Crashplan has a stable reputation and seems much less expensive for large backups. For those who have researched Crashplan, why did you choose Arq instead?

I'm using Crashplan now but when my subscription runs out I will switch to Arq+AWS Glacier. I'm currently around the 300GB mark for backup space. Using glacier this would cost me $3/month, about $36/year or half as much as I'm paying for Crashplan ($60 with a discount). Even if it was more expensive for me, I would still switch, because I don't trust Crashplan completely. There have been stories from users of backups…

Don't you need to pay a ton to actually get your data out of glacier?

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#27

Post by MikeCodeAwesome »

tunesmith wrote: post #17

I've regularly been curious about this, but Crashplan has a stable reputation and seems much less expensive for large backups. For those who have researched Crashplan, why did you choose Arq instead?

I've used JungleDisk, CrashPlan, and now Arq.

I left JungleDisk because it went sideways and S3 was too expensive. After that was CrashPlan; I liked its free remote backup option. But then my backup destination disappeared behind carrier grade NAT. That left me with paying for regular CrashPlan or looking elsewhere. Enter Arq.

Based on my estimated usage, for two computers, I calculated the following estimated yearly cost.

   JungleDisk S3 $288
   CrashPlan     $120
   Arq Glacier   $ 32
Assuming I didn't screw up my estimate, Glacier was a no-brainer, even with up-front cost of two Arq licenses ($70).

This month is the first full month in which I'm not seeding my initial Arq backup to Glacier. I'm hopeful that the cost will be significantly lower than CrashPlan.

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#28

Post by willtheperson »

Can someone tell me why I shouldn't be using BitTorrent Sync as a multi-location backup plan?

In other words, can someone sell me on the idea of paying for AWS storage when I have dirt cheap storage around my house and even a remote location that I can stuff a huge drive in.

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#29

Post by relix »

archagon wrote: post #25
relix wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using Crashplan now but when my subscription runs out I will switch to Arq+AWS Glacier. I'm currently around the 300GB mark for backup space. Using glacier this would cost me $3/month, about $36/year or half as much as I'm paying for Crashplan ($60 with a discount). Even if it was more expensive for me, I would still switch, because I don't trust Crashplan completely. There have been stories from users of backups…

Don't you need to pay a ton to actually get your data out of glacier?

That's ok. When that happens I'll gladly pay a premium to get my data fast. That should only happen once every few years though.

Re: Arq 4 is out – Mac backup to S3/Glacier

#30

Post by leejoramo »

tunesmith wrote: post #17

I've regularly been curious about this, but Crashplan has a stable reputation and seems much less expensive for large backups. For those who have researched Crashplan, why did you choose Arq instead?

As I have replied to several questions in this thread and said that I use both CrashPlan and Arq for remote backups let me give my rational.

CrashPlan: I have used since soon after they first appeared for Mac. They have really strong compression and de-duplication to minimize and speed data transfers. I personally use their consumer and small business solutions. However, I also maintain their CrashPlan PROe enterprise backup for several clients. The fact that they have a very strong enterprise product, provides me with a great deal of trust in the quality of CrashPlan's work. I think they have be best solution I have used for a notebook that is on the move. I backup to both their remote servers and to my own home office server. Thus, I have the option to quickly restore from my own local server, their much slower remote server AND I can have a CrashPlan Next Day send me a copy of my data on a disk drive. I do wish they could get rid of the Java dependency for their Mac Client software since it is a RAM hog. CrashPlan rates very well at saving Mac OS X meta data.

Arq: I like the approach to backing up to Amazon S3 which I know is a very reliable storage environment, and Glacier has made it dirt cheap for last resort archival backups. I like the fact that at least through Version 3 there has been an open source software GitHub hosted restore. If Haystack software disappears there are still options to restore. I believe Arq is one of the very few Mac OS X remote backup systems that preserves ALL meta data.

I have used lots backup software over 30 years. Every backup system has failings and bugs. And the operator (normally me) is capable of making mistakes. That is why I use multiple products to do backup.

I am interested in exploring Arq new features especially using SSH/SFTP which will allow me to self host, and may cause me to re-evaluate my overall backup approach.

Post reply on HN