5 ms·

The CrashPlan client is horrific but at least it runs on Linux unlike Backblaze. I was hoping Backblaze was better, too bad.

haasn 10y ago
Wait, wouldn't that be standard? I've never used online backup, but I would naively assume that Linux would just have a block device or FUSE driver for these things. How can that not be the case?
- anonbiocoward 10y ago
  I'm not sure, what would a block device have to do with diff'd filesystem backups? And what would FUSE add? I'm pretty sure the CrashPlan client a .jar, so you just need a jvm, thus broad OS compatibility.
  - haasn 10y ago
    On second thought, block devices are sort of sketchy for this use case - but FUSE still seems like a perfectly natural way to export networked storage. I'd expect a backup hierarchy to just be a directory of read-only snapshots of my files - I mean, this is how I organize backups locally either way (e.g. /snapshot/YYYY-MM-DD/etc/whatever.conf). The advantage of using a standard API like filesystems and FUSE is that you can use it easily and from the terminal without needing to deal with bloated GUIs and JVMs that are no doubt hard to install, hard to use and hard to rely on. A JVM is also a pretty hefty requirement to have on a machine. (I personally avoid installing it all costs, mostly because everything that targets JVM seems to be crud to begin with)
click170 10y ago
This really kills me about Backblaze. I'd love to support them, I'd prefer no other backup vendor. That's why this is so hurtful: https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/217664628-Is-Backblaze-going-to-offer-Linux-support- https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/217664628-Is-Ba... Spoiler alert, the answer is a surprisingly firm no. Not even an optimistic "we're working on it!". Doesn't even have to be "Linux support", just open an API, we'll do the rest! Use quotas for API users if the concern is around abuse, but please help us Linux folks use your service! Please!
- tener 10y ago
  They say they don't have enough workforce for the Linux client to happen now, not that they won't ever do it.
- aidenn0 10y ago
  Don't they have a storage API now at $0.005/GB/mo?
- brianwski 10y ago
  Brian from Backblaze here. We support Linux now with our command line tool found here: https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/quick_command_line.html https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/quick_command_line.html There is no GUI, but the command line tool can "sync" your files with an arbitrary roll back time (the Mac/Windows client are hard coded to 30 days). For good or bad, syncing to B2 charges "per GByte". If you have less than 1 TByte this will be cheaper than the $5/month for the Mac or Windows client. But if you have more than 1 TByte on Linux, it will cost you about $5/TByte/Month to back it up.
mbesto 10y ago
I have yet to use a single backup client that didn't suck (i.e. churn my CPU, get out of my way, etc). That being said, Druva InSync has been OK-ish so far.

haasn 10y ago

Wait, wouldn't that be standard? I've never used online backup, but I would naively assume that Linux would just have a block device or FUSE driver for these things. How can that not be the case?

anonbiocoward 10y ago
I'm not sure, what would a block device have to do with diff'd filesystem backups? And what would FUSE add? I'm pretty sure the CrashPlan client a .jar, so you just need a jvm, thus broad OS compatibility.
- haasn 10y ago
  On second thought, block devices are sort of sketchy for this use case - but FUSE still seems like a perfectly natural way to export networked storage. I'd expect a backup hierarchy to just be a directory of read-only snapshots of my files - I mean, this is how I organize backups locally either way (e.g. /snapshot/YYYY-MM-DD/etc/whatever.conf). The advantage of using a standard API like filesystems and FUSE is that you can use it easily and from the terminal without needing to deal with bloated GUIs and JVMs that are no doubt hard to install, hard to use and hard to rely on. A JVM is also a pretty hefty requirement to have on a machine. (I personally avoid installing it all costs, mostly because everything that targets JVM seems to be crud to begin with)

click170 10y ago

This really kills me about Backblaze. I'd love to support them, I'd prefer no other backup vendor. That's why this is so hurtful: https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/217664628-Is-Backblaze-going-to-offer-Linux-support- https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/217664628-Is-Ba... Spoiler alert, the answer is a surprisingly firm no. Not even an optimistic "we're working on it!". Doesn't even have to be "Linux support", just open an API, we'll do the rest! Use quotas for API users if the concern is around abuse, but please help us Linux folks use your service! Please!

tener 10y ago
They say they don't have enough workforce for the Linux client to happen now, not that they won't ever do it.
aidenn0 10y ago
Don't they have a storage API now at $0.005/GB/mo?
brianwski 10y ago
Brian from Backblaze here. We support Linux now with our command line tool found here: https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/quick_command_line.html https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/quick_command_line.html There is no GUI, but the command line tool can "sync" your files with an arbitrary roll back time (the Mac/Windows client are hard coded to 30 days). For good or bad, syncing to B2 charges "per GByte". If you have less than 1 TByte this will be cheaper than the $5/month for the Mac or Windows client. But if you have more than 1 TByte on Linux, it will cost you about $5/TByte/Month to back it up.

mbesto 10y ago

I have yet to use a single backup client that didn't suck (i.e. churn my CPU, get out of my way, etc). That being said, Druva InSync has been OK-ish so far.