5 ms·
Well it's quite expensive compared to other solutions.
by msh 9y ago
Well it's quite expensive compared to other solutions.
- zie 9y agoIt really isn't. I mean it looks expensive, until you take into account all the dedup and everything it does to reduce the cost. I put in $10 dollars a few years ago, I still have almost a $4 balance ($3.91).
- riobard 9y agoHow much data are you storing?
- zie 9y agonot much obviously, I am only storing critical data in tarsnap. Like others have said, if you are storing large GB's or TB's of data, rsync.net or something may be a better solution.
- SCdF 9y agoIt depends on what you're backing up. If you're generating a lot of unique non-dedupable assets (eg you're a photographer who keeps their raws) it quickly becomes very expensive. Don't get me wrong, I love tarsnap and used to use it, but for a lot of workloads it does not compete on price.
- msh 9y agoWell I guess it depends on what you store. I am backing up 1.5 terabyte of photos and videos which can't be compressed or dedup that much so in this case it would be more expensive that many other solutions.
- frankzinger 9y agoTo concur with my sibling commenter zie (who said that tarsnap is not that expensive): $ tarsnap --print-stats Total size Compressed size All archives 1418275826434 1212480481405 (unique data) 5342739088 2957847871 Ie, I have ~1.3TB of data stored in total but I am only being charged ($0.0239 US per day) for what amounts to ~2.75GB after deduplication and compression. Mind you, I have not compared tarsnap's prices to those of equivalent services, but it seems pretty reasonably-priced to me.
- icebraining 9y agoRight, all providers are cheap if you barely use any storage.
- frankzinger 9y agoYeah, I am surprised at how cheap Backblaze is, according to one of the comments here. I will say though that what I've read about tarsnap's security and my experience with it as a user makes me reluctant to want to switch. I guess I might look into it once I need to store more data. I have had some really bad experiences with other backup systems so having something which I am quite sure is very secure and which works reliably is great. The slow restore times somebody else mentioned might be a problem though. I've only had to restore small archives/files.
- tedmiston 9y ago1.3 TB deduplicating & compressing down to 2.75 GB seems way too good to be true. Is there something weird about your data that leads to this level of compression?
- frankzinger 9y agoYeah, apart from 1.6GB of documents that are mostly PDF, it's all text (mostly code). And I back up multiple times a day so there's a lot of duplicate data.