3 ms·

How does any of those similar solutions solve the data backup problem? I always think GitHub / GitLab also serves as an off-site backup.

FpUser 6y ago
I use Gitea to self-host. Since I do not have rest of the world to serve, just my company, I use script that at 3 AM stops servicing all requests, shuts down Gitea server and does binary backup locally and then also sends backup to offsite servers. After backup it restarts the server. Since Gitea is configured to use SQLite backing up database part is just the part of that binary files backup. Separate script can restore from backup. All in all seems pretty safe to me. Obviously it does not scale to Github proportions.
- temp8964 6y ago
  It's not just the scripts. There is an offsite server need to be setup, and maybe paid to keep it reliably running for the long term. Sounds too much ado for nothing compared to use free private repos on GitHub / GitLab.
  - FpUser 6y ago
    I do not have standby servers just for git. I run small software development company hence we have it anyways already. We have products that run on servers. Servers are self hosted with standby servers rented elsewhere. I have this infrastructure already for many years. Standby servers do not cost a lot in monthly fees and for what we do it is orders of magnitude less than cloudy companies would charge us. Maintenance wise it is easy. In any way I am not letting other company to be in control of my infrastructure and data.
qbasic_forever 6y ago
I don't think Github or Gitlab have serious SLAs unless you're an enterprise customer. Don't stake the future of your project or code on the backup and management of a service you pay no money to use. Keep at least your own local clones and offsite backups. The 3-2-1 rule still applies if it's data you care about.
- temp8964 6y ago
  A. GitHub / GitLab + local clones B. self-hosted server + self-maintained offsite backup A is obviously easier than B. And also A has tons of other benefits.

FpUser 6y ago

I use Gitea to self-host. Since I do not have rest of the world to serve, just my company, I use script that at 3 AM stops servicing all requests, shuts down Gitea server and does binary backup locally and then also sends backup to offsite servers. After backup it restarts the server. Since Gitea is configured to use SQLite backing up database part is just the part of that binary files backup. Separate script can restore from backup. All in all seems pretty safe to me. Obviously it does not scale to Github proportions.

temp8964 6y ago
It's not just the scripts. There is an offsite server need to be setup, and maybe paid to keep it reliably running for the long term. Sounds too much ado for nothing compared to use free private repos on GitHub / GitLab.
- FpUser 6y ago
  I do not have standby servers just for git. I run small software development company hence we have it anyways already. We have products that run on servers. Servers are self hosted with standby servers rented elsewhere. I have this infrastructure already for many years. Standby servers do not cost a lot in monthly fees and for what we do it is orders of magnitude less than cloudy companies would charge us. Maintenance wise it is easy. In any way I am not letting other company to be in control of my infrastructure and data.

qbasic_forever 6y ago

I don't think Github or Gitlab have serious SLAs unless you're an enterprise customer. Don't stake the future of your project or code on the backup and management of a service you pay no money to use. Keep at least your own local clones and offsite backups. The 3-2-1 rule still applies if it's data you care about.

temp8964 6y ago
A. GitHub / GitLab + local clones B. self-hosted server + self-maintained offsite backup A is obviously easier than B. And also A has tons of other benefits.