6 ms·

Can someone please help decide what is the "best" backup software? - Restic (https://restic.net/ https://restic.net/) - Borg backup (https://www.borgbackup.or

Can someone please help decide what is the "best" backup software? - Restic (https://restic.net/ https://restic.net/) - Borg backup (https://www.borgbackup.org/ https://www.borgbackup.org/) - Duplicati (https://www.duplicati.com/ https://www.duplicati.com/) - Kopia (https://kopia.io/ https://kopia.io/) - Duplicay (https://duplicacy.com/ https://duplicacy.com/) - Duplicity (https://duplicity.us/ https://duplicity.us/)

Aerbil313 3y ago
My only complaint with Restic is that filesystem scans take too much time. I'm gonna switch over to ZFS probably though.
keep_reading 3y ago
Bacula I've tried all of these, and none are as reliable or powerful as Bacula. It's way more complex at first, but you will have peace of mind. And backup/restore speed is way faster. You can even easily setup automatic restore jobs to prove your backups work!
- MenhirMike 3y ago
  Do you know how Bacula compares to Bareos? Bacula is on my to-do list to look at (also because I need tape backups), but the Bareos fork seems to have a more modern interface - but I've not stress tested either solution. The fact that Bacula has a Debian package and Bareos does not pretty much settles it already, but just curious if someone has actually tried both.
  - keep_reading 3y ago
    They're nearly identical otherwise, so just choose what works for you
bhaney 3y ago
I can't give you a meaningful comparison between all of those, because I haven't used all of them, but I can say that I've been pretty happy with Restic in the time I've been using it. Do you have any odd requirements that one might serve better than the rest? If you just want bog-standard backups, any of them will probably do.
Linux-Fan 3y ago
Bupstash (https://bupstash.io/ https://bupstash.io/) beats Borg and Kopia in my tests (see https://masysma.net/37/backup_tests_borg_bupstash_kopia.xhtml https://masysma.net/37/backup_tests_borg_bupstash_kopia.xhtm...). It is a modern take very close to what Borg offers regarding the feature set but has a significantly better performance (in terms of resource use for running tasks, the backups were slightly larger than Borg's in my tests).
- pdimitar 3y ago
  Last I tried it, it didn't compress well. Did it improve? Does it have zstd compression?
- dsissitka 3y ago
  > Borg ... multiple hosts backup to same target ... Yes It might be worth adding an asterisk there. https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/faq.html#can-i-backup-from-multiple-servers-into-a-single-repository https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/faq.html#can-i-b...
  - Linux-Fan 3y ago
    Indeed, thank you for pointing this out. I have added a footnote to the page accordingly.
- ajvs 3y ago
  Lacks features like mounting a filesystem as read-only to restore though. I find that makes restoring files much simpler. I'll look into bupstash some more perhaps but right now am very happy with Vorta/Borg.
mekster 3y ago
Do yourself a favor and use zfs as your primary backup, even though it means you'll have to replace your filesystem, it's just that good. Faster than any other backup software (because it knows what's changed from the last snapshot being the filesystem itself but external backup tools always have to scan the entire directories to know what's changed), battle tested reliability with added benefit like transparent compression. A bit of explanation on how fast it can be than external tools. (I don't work for the said service in the article or promote it.) https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/12/rsync-net-zfs-replication-to-the-cloud-is-finally-here-and-its-fast/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/12/rsync... Then you'll realize Borg is the one with least data corruption complaint on the internet which is good as your secondary backup. Easily checked with, "[app name] data corruption" on Google. And see who else lists vulnerability and corruption bugs upfront like Borg does and know the developers are forthcoming about these important issues. https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/changes.html https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/changes.html The term "best" apparently means reliable for backup and also they don't start choking on large data sets taking huge amount of memories and roundtrip times. They don't work against your favorite S3 compatible targets but there are services that can be targeted for those tools or just roll your own dedicated backup $5 Linux instance to avoid crying in the future. With those 2, I don't care what other tools exist anymore.
- WhrRTheBaboons 3y ago
  Seconding zfs
- donmcronald 3y ago
  I use ZFS + Sanoid + Syncoid locally and Borg + Borgmatic + BorgBase for offsite.
dpbriggs 3y ago
Personally I use borg with BorgTUI (https://github.com/dpbriggs/borgtui https://github.com/dpbriggs/borgtui) to schedule backups and manage sources/repositories. I'm quite pleased with the simplicity of it compared to some of the other solutions.

Aerbil313 3y ago

My only complaint with Restic is that filesystem scans take too much time. I'm gonna switch over to ZFS probably though.

keep_reading 3y ago

Bacula I've tried all of these, and none are as reliable or powerful as Bacula. It's way more complex at first, but you will have peace of mind. And backup/restore speed is way faster. You can even easily setup automatic restore jobs to prove your backups work!

MenhirMike 3y ago
Do you know how Bacula compares to Bareos? Bacula is on my to-do list to look at (also because I need tape backups), but the Bareos fork seems to have a more modern interface - but I've not stress tested either solution. The fact that Bacula has a Debian package and Bareos does not pretty much settles it already, but just curious if someone has actually tried both.
- keep_reading 3y ago
  They're nearly identical otherwise, so just choose what works for you

bhaney 3y ago

I can't give you a meaningful comparison between all of those, because I haven't used all of them, but I can say that I've been pretty happy with Restic in the time I've been using it. Do you have any odd requirements that one might serve better than the rest? If you just want bog-standard backups, any of them will probably do.

Linux-Fan 3y ago

Bupstash (https://bupstash.io/ https://bupstash.io/) beats Borg and Kopia in my tests (see https://masysma.net/37/backup_tests_borg_bupstash_kopia.xhtml https://masysma.net/37/backup_tests_borg_bupstash_kopia.xhtm...). It is a modern take very close to what Borg offers regarding the feature set but has a significantly better performance (in terms of resource use for running tasks, the backups were slightly larger than Borg's in my tests).

pdimitar 3y ago
Last I tried it, it didn't compress well. Did it improve? Does it have zstd compression?
dsissitka 3y ago
> Borg ... multiple hosts backup to same target ... Yes It might be worth adding an asterisk there. https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/faq.html#can-i-backup-from-multiple-servers-into-a-single-repository https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/faq.html#can-i-b...
- Linux-Fan 3y ago
  Indeed, thank you for pointing this out. I have added a footnote to the page accordingly.
ajvs 3y ago
Lacks features like mounting a filesystem as read-only to restore though. I find that makes restoring files much simpler. I'll look into bupstash some more perhaps but right now am very happy with Vorta/Borg.

mekster 3y ago

Do yourself a favor and use zfs as your primary backup, even though it means you'll have to replace your filesystem, it's just that good. Faster than any other backup software (because it knows what's changed from the last snapshot being the filesystem itself but external backup tools always have to scan the entire directories to know what's changed), battle tested reliability with added benefit like transparent compression. A bit of explanation on how fast it can be than external tools. (I don't work for the said service in the article or promote it.) https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/12/rsync-net-zfs-replication-to-the-cloud-is-finally-here-and-its-fast/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/12/rsync... Then you'll realize Borg is the one with least data corruption complaint on the internet which is good as your secondary backup. Easily checked with, "[app name] data corruption" on Google. And see who else lists vulnerability and corruption bugs upfront like Borg does and know the developers are forthcoming about these important issues. https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/changes.html https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/changes.html The term "best" apparently means reliable for backup and also they don't start choking on large data sets taking huge amount of memories and roundtrip times. They don't work against your favorite S3 compatible targets but there are services that can be targeted for those tools or just roll your own dedicated backup $5 Linux instance to avoid crying in the future. With those 2, I don't care what other tools exist anymore.

WhrRTheBaboons 3y ago
Seconding zfs
donmcronald 3y ago
I use ZFS + Sanoid + Syncoid locally and Borg + Borgmatic + BorgBase for offsite.

dpbriggs 3y ago

Personally I use borg with BorgTUI (https://github.com/dpbriggs/borgtui https://github.com/dpbriggs/borgtui) to schedule backups and manage sources/repositories. I'm quite pleased with the simplicity of it compared to some of the other solutions.