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

BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 119 posts

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#31

Post by champtar »

homebrewer wrote: post #9

For anyone looking to migrate off borg because of this, append-only is available in restic, but only with the rest-server backend: https://github.com/restic/restic https://github.com/restic/rest-server which has to be started with --append-only. I use this systemd unit: [Unit] After=network-online.target [Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target [Service] ExecStart=/usr/local/bin/rest-server --path /mnt/backups --append-o…

If you want to use some object storage instead of local disk, rclone can be a restic server: https://rclone.org/commands/rclone_serve_restic/

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#32

Post by gaadd33 »

globular-toast wrote: post #22
homebrewer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Are there any good options for an off-site zfs backup server besides a colo? 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? The…

I think Rsync.net supports zfs send/receive

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#34

Post by anyfoo »

puffybuf wrote: post #25

I've been using device mapper+encryption to backup my files to encrypted filesystem on regular files. (cryptsetup on linux, vnconfig+bioctl on openbsd). Is there a reason for me to use borgbackup? Maybe to save space? 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 b…

Does your solution do incremental backups at all? I have backups going back years, because through incremental backups each delta is not very large.

Every once in a while things gets sparsed out, so that for example I have daily backups for the recent past, but only monthly and then even yearly for further back.

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#35

Post by nathants »

yread wrote: post #33
nathants wrote: post #24

Do something simpler. Backups shouldn’t be complex. This should be simpler still: https://github.com/nathants/backup

Uh, who has the money to store backups in AWS?!

Depends how big they are. My high value backups go into S3, R2, and a local x3 disk mirror[1].

My low value backups go into a cheap usb hdd from Best Buy.

1. https://github.com/nathants/mirror

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#36

Post by singhrac »

TheFreim wrote: post #12

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?

I spent too long looking into this and settled on restic. I'm satisfied with the performance for our large repo and datasets, though we'll probably supplement it with filesystem-based backups at some point.

Borg has the issue that it is in limbo, i.e. all the new features (including object storage support) are in Borg2, but there's no clear date when that will be stable. I also did not like that it was written in Python, because backups are not always IO blocked (we have some very large directories, etc.).

I really liked borgmatic on Borg, but we found resticprofile which is pretty much the same thing (it is underdiscussed). After some testing I think it is important to set GOGC and read-concurrency parameters, as a tip. All the GUIs are very ugly, but we're fine a CLI.

If rustic matures enough and is worth a switch we might consider it.

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#37

Post by rsync »

homebrewer wrote: post #9

For anyone looking to migrate off borg because of this, append-only is available in restic, but only with the rest-server backend: https://github.com/restic/restic https://github.com/restic/rest-server which has to be started with --append-only. I use this systemd unit: [Unit] After=network-online.target [Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target [Service] ExecStart=/usr/local/bin/rest-server --path /mnt/backups --append-o…

You can achieve append-only without exposing a rest server provided that 'rclone' can be called on the remote end:

  rclone serve restic --stdio
You add something like this to ~/.ssh/authorized_keys:

  restrict,command="rclone serve restic --stdio --append-only backups/my-restic-repo" ssh-rsa ...
... and then run a command like this:

  ssh user@rsync.net rclone serve restic --stdio ...
We just started deploying this on rsync.net servers - which is to say, we maintain an arguments allowlist for every binary you can execute here and we never allowed 'rclone serve' ... but now we do, IFF it is accompanied by --stdio.

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#38

Post by aeadio »

seymon wrote: post #29
aborsy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I am already using zfs on my NAS where I want my backups to be. But I didn't consider it for backups till now

You can consider something like syncthing to get the important files onto your NAS, and then use ZFS snapshots and replication via syncoid/sanoid to do the actual backing up.

Re: BorgBackup 2 has no server-side append-only anymore

#39

Post by aeadio »

globular-toast wrote: post #22
homebrewer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Are there any good options for an off-site zfs backup server besides a colo? 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? The…

Aside from rsync.net which was mentioned in a sibling comment, there’s also https://zfs.rent, or any VPS with Linux or FreeBSD installed.
Post reply on HN