4 ms·
To concur with my sibling commenter zie (who said that tarsnap is not that expensive): $ tarsnap --print-stats Total size Compre
by frankzinger 9y ago
To 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.