3 ms·

Please don't singly use cloud backups. Your first line should be a local backup solution like a Time Capsule or other NAS device. Blind trust in a black box bac

Please don't singly use cloud backups. Your first line should be a local backup solution like a Time Capsule or other NAS device. Blind trust in a black box backup is not prudent.

SeanKilleen 13y ago
Precisely the point I'm making. It was hubris and laziness and I'm surprised that I let myself go that long. In a follow-up article I discuss an overview of what I'll be doing going forward: http://www.seankilleen.com/2014/01/my-newest-backup-system-process-lessons.html http://www.seankilleen.com/2014/01/my-newest-backup-system-p...
- Retric 13y ago
  There is nothing wrong with trusting online backup providers provided your data is backed up on two or more of them and there not both using the same back-end (aka Amazon s3).
  - SeanKilleen 13y ago
    I agree, and I would add to that: "as long as you also have a local source." That was my failure here. Had I backed up to a local source, the slow restore times / issues would be marginal at best. So there are two lessons from my perspective: Backblaze needs to get its restore scenarios fixed for folks like me, and I need to get my shit together as far as a back up strategy. Good lessons to be learned for all I think.
sahaskatta 13y ago
For this very reason I've always backed-up to both an encrypted external HDD and another encrypted copy in the cloud.
forgottenpass 13y ago
Whenever a cloud service failure is posted to HN, there are always posts basically telling the OP that expecting the service you paid for is a silly idea. Why isn't the SaaS industry in general roundly criticized as the fly by night hacks they always turn out to be when someone gets burnt?
- SeanKilleen 13y ago
  Haha, I appreciate the defense. At the same time, I understand the economical aspect of the service, and there is a measure of "you get what you pay for." To be fair, I wouldn't call Backblaze hacks by any means, but I understand your point about the business responsibilities of companies and not giving them a pass just because they're a price-friendly SaaS.
crazygringo 13y ago
If you're going to only have one backup (which is the case for most people, realistically), your first choice should be cloud, not local. As far as I know, the chances of something physically happening to your local backup (the hardware fails, someone knocks it off the shelf, it gets lost in a move, there's a fire) is vastly greater than the chance that your online provider loses your data. Yes, obviously it's better to have both, but the fact that cloud is both off-site and stored redundantly off-site makes cloud the obvious first choice for most people (since most people are not setting up RAID arrays at separate locations).
- acdha 13y ago
  > the chances of something physically happening to your local backup (the hardware fails, someone knocks it off the shelf, it gets lost in a move, there's a fire) is vastly greater than the chance that your online provider loses your data. This is the key part: almost all of the failure modes affecting local storage also endanger local backups. Cloud backups are intrinsically less risky in that regard, although a local provider might still be affected by a massive natural disaster. The remaining class of errors, however, are nasty ones like bit rot, human error or malice – all of which are tricky to prevent.
erkkie 13y ago
The more general advice would be to test your backups, whether they're online or offline (ideally both). Now I should go and practice what I praise ...

Please don't singly use cloud backups. Your first line should be a local backup solution like a Time Capsule or other NAS device. Blind trust in a black box backup is not prudent.

SeanKilleen 13y ago

Precisely the point I'm making. It was hubris and laziness and I'm surprised that I let myself go that long. In a follow-up article I discuss an overview of what I'll be doing going forward: http://www.seankilleen.com/2014/01/my-newest-backup-system-process-lessons.html http://www.seankilleen.com/2014/01/my-newest-backup-system-p...

Retric 13y ago
There is nothing wrong with trusting online backup providers provided your data is backed up on two or more of them and there not both using the same back-end (aka Amazon s3).
- SeanKilleen 13y ago
  I agree, and I would add to that: "as long as you also have a local source." That was my failure here. Had I backed up to a local source, the slow restore times / issues would be marginal at best. So there are two lessons from my perspective: Backblaze needs to get its restore scenarios fixed for folks like me, and I need to get my shit together as far as a back up strategy. Good lessons to be learned for all I think.

sahaskatta 13y ago

For this very reason I've always backed-up to both an encrypted external HDD and another encrypted copy in the cloud.

forgottenpass 13y ago

Whenever a cloud service failure is posted to HN, there are always posts basically telling the OP that expecting the service you paid for is a silly idea. Why isn't the SaaS industry in general roundly criticized as the fly by night hacks they always turn out to be when someone gets burnt?

SeanKilleen 13y ago
Haha, I appreciate the defense. At the same time, I understand the economical aspect of the service, and there is a measure of "you get what you pay for." To be fair, I wouldn't call Backblaze hacks by any means, but I understand your point about the business responsibilities of companies and not giving them a pass just because they're a price-friendly SaaS.

crazygringo 13y ago

If you're going to only have one backup (which is the case for most people, realistically), your first choice should be cloud, not local. As far as I know, the chances of something physically happening to your local backup (the hardware fails, someone knocks it off the shelf, it gets lost in a move, there's a fire) is vastly greater than the chance that your online provider loses your data. Yes, obviously it's better to have both, but the fact that cloud is both off-site and stored redundantly off-site makes cloud the obvious first choice for most people (since most people are not setting up RAID arrays at separate locations).

acdha 13y ago
> the chances of something physically happening to your local backup (the hardware fails, someone knocks it off the shelf, it gets lost in a move, there's a fire) is vastly greater than the chance that your online provider loses your data. This is the key part: almost all of the failure modes affecting local storage also endanger local backups. Cloud backups are intrinsically less risky in that regard, although a local provider might still be affected by a massive natural disaster. The remaining class of errors, however, are nasty ones like bit rot, human error or malice – all of which are tricky to prevent.

erkkie 13y ago

The more general advice would be to test your backups, whether they're online or offline (ideally both). Now I should go and practice what I praise ...