4 ms·
I don't know if you're just using rsync, but automatically syncing modifications, corruptions and deletions without any kind of retention system isn't a good id
by rlpb 4y ago
I don't know if you're just using rsync, but automatically syncing modifications, corruptions and deletions without any kind of retention system isn't a good idea, and your post reads like that's what you're doing. If you can't recover when you accidentally deleted something a month ago and want it back, I wouldn't call what you have a backup system.
The difference between rsync and borgbackup is exactly this: the latter does backup retention properly.
- sph 4y agoThanks, that's a good argument for trying borg. To be honest it was simpler to use rsync with my NAS than hacking borg in last I checked. My use case has always been to save my data in case of disaster, I haven't needed to rollback an accidental deletion... yet. That said, rsync.net has daily ZFS snapshots with weekly retention, so you're able to roll back in that case.
- cillian64 4y agoI run a borg backup from my synology NAS to rsync.net and it was pretty easy to set up. I installed borg and borgmatic from the community repositories and use the synology scheduler to run it nightly. I followed the tutorial at https://docs.borgbase.com/setup/synology/ https://docs.borgbase.com/setup/synology/.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- neurostimulant 4y agorsync.net retains the last 7 days backup (via zfs snapshots) for free though. That's enough retention period for many people. You can add more of you want, but you'll pay for the extra storage usage.
- derkades 4y agoI'd argue it's not enough. If you're using ZFS, you may notice a corrupt file during a monthly scrub. If you're not using ZFS, you may only find out years into the future, when the backups are long gone. For accidental deletions, 7 days is indeed most likely fine.
- 6ak74rfy 4y agoYou can configure snapshots for at least a few months, maybe more. Just that those for the first 7 days are free.
- ASalazarMX 4y ago> automatically syncing [..] corruptions [..] This made me shudder. I used to replicate external drive A to B, in case one failed. Drive A failed by slowly corrupting file contents, which I didn't notice until a significant part of them was synced to B. Fun times. Sync is not a synonym of backup.
- rsync 4y ago"I don't know if you're just using rsync, but automatically syncing modifications, corruptions and deletions without any kind of retention system isn't a good idea ..." This is, broadly, correct. However, we have been encouraging our customers to configure "dumb" 1:1 mirror rsync jobs to us and then allow the platform to handle all of the retention with the ZFS snapshots. An rsync.net customer configures any arbitrary schedule of days/weeks/months/quarters/years and then we (rsync.net) handle the rotation, retention and maintenance of these snapshots. The benefits of this, beyond the fire and forget aspect, are twofold: First, they are more efficient than typical retention schemes like 'rsnapshot' or "rsync snapshots" since ZFS diffs on a bit basis and not a full file basis - so if you change a file, but only by a little bit, you don't pay the entire size of the files as a penalty in your snapshot size. Second, the ZFS snapshots are immutable. Even if someone steals your rsync.net credentials and wipes out your entire account, the snapshots cannot be changed.[1] Of course you may do whatever you'd like - you can even configure snapshots on an account you use 'borg' with and get very inefficient "snapshots of snapshots". Whatever makes you happy - we just give you an empty UNIX filesystem to do whatever you like with. [1] https://twitter.com/rsyncnet/status/1453044746213990405 https://twitter.com/rsyncnet/status/1453044746213990405