3 ms·
I've used both Borg and Restic pretty heavily. I settled on Restic because it was much lighter on resources. A few of the servers I manage have small amounts
by johntash 8y ago
I've used both Borg and Restic pretty heavily. I settled on Restic because it was much lighter on resources. A few of the servers I manage have small amounts of ram, but large amounts of data. Borg would often get oom-killed, but Restic wouldn't.
Restic also starts uploading changes as soon as it sees them, whereas borg has to scan the entire list of files before it starts uploading changes. Unfortunately for multi-tb datasets with millions of files, borg would take hours just to scan all of the files.
Pruning old archives also worked a lot better in Restic compared to Borg.
If you're happy with Restic, I'd keep sticking with it.
- linsomniac 8y agoInteresting. I had deployed restic to my fleet of 100 servers around a year ago to backup to a common Backblaze B2 destination, and rolled it back after running into a production service getting OOM killed because of restic memory use.
- johntash 8y agoThat's interesting, did you have a lot of small files or large files? I don't know if it's an option for you, but have you considered something like rsync from each server to a central backup server and then running restic/borg/whatever on that server? Sometimes that works out nicely too, and would be less impactful to other services on the machine. What did you switch to instead of restic, if you don't mind me asking?