4 ms·
You know, I actually assumed it had compression. It looks like it will get it eventually though, so I'm not too worried. That said, I can get some benefits by c
by mike-cardwell 7y ago
You know, I actually assumed it had compression. It looks like it will get it eventually though, so I'm not too worried. That said, I can get some benefits by compressing some of my backups myself. For example, I currently backup my postgres dbs with cron jobs like:
$ pg_dump dbname | restic backup --stdin --stdin-filename dbname.dump --tag dbname -q
With restoring as simple as:
$ restic dump latest --tag dbname dbname.dump | psql dbname
I should probably stick a gzip/gunzip between those two commands.
- adrianmonk 7y agoIf you stick a cheese up in there, restic will probably lose some of its ability to deduplicate. If it does compression, then it's not an opaque process to it. But if you do it, you are essentially obfuscating the structure of the data.
- mike-cardwell 7y agoGood point. I'll stay away from cheesing up my commands and wait for it to be built in.
- mynegation 7y agoWhat is "cheesing up"?
- adrianmonk 7y agoIt's what Google speech-to-text thinks I meant when I said "gzip" into my phone.
- sliken 7y agoHa, I was thinking there's a new gzip competitor I needed to track down called cheese.
- tatersolid 7y agogzip with the —rsyncable flag will still allow for deduplication. It uses a content-aware rolling checksum and resets the compression dictionary whenever that checksum has a certain number of zeros. The result is a valid gzip file with a few percent less compression, but friendly to deduplication (which is what rsync does).