3 ms·
inefficiencies that the older, duplicity software has. As much as I love duplicity, it does sort of suck when you get into larger numbers of files and gigabyte
by blakesterz 7y ago
inefficiencies that the older, duplicity software has.
As much as I love duplicity, it does sort of suck when you get into larger numbers of files and gigabytes of data. It's so darn slow sometimes it's almost unusable. Good to know borg is better, I've been meaning to check that out!
- JackMcMack 7y agoIt's incredibly slow (backing up 1.5TB took more than a day), but the built-in support for PAR2 makes it worth it (for me). Sadly, it seems like borg has no built-in support for any kind of redundancy [1] [1] https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/225 https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/225
- Erlich_Bachman 7y agoDuplicity and Borg use two very distinct technologies under the hood - duplicity does differential partial backup archives (which all require a full backup AND a full list of all previous differential archives) and Borg uses deduplication. So yes it is much more efficient in many ways, not simply because it is newer and somehow is more efficiently coded, it is so because it uses different technology and backup model.