eexan

4 ms·

1.
by eexan 6y ago
Backup as in backing up one perkeep instance to another is the "pk sync" command ( https://github.com/perkeep/perkeep/blob/master/cmd/pk/sync.g... ). You give it the addresses of source
2.
by eexan 6y ago
Deduplication is naturally handled by content-addressable property of this object store: the address of each object is its cryptographic hash, SHA224 in Perkeep. So if you try to put a duplicate copy, you'll find that the address at wh
3.
by eexan 6y ago
Reading the docs, snapshotting/versioning doesn't strike me as a major feature of perkeep. It's more important and appropriate in the domain of backup software (e.g. restic/attic/borg) and where you'd want it t
4.
by eexan 6y ago
I'm more of a backend person myself, and perkeep disappoints on that side too. See my other comment about how much time it took to ingest just one .iso. I don't think this system would handle a 5 TB video file as the authors claim
5.
by eexan 6y ago
About $30k - https://opencollective.com/perkeep/expenses - which is more than most OSS projects would ever see in their lifetime, so it's not such a good excuse for lacking documentation and UX.
6.
by eexan 6y ago
For the most part, it's just an object storage (think Amazon S3). Content addressable (think Git): you put an object (file bytes) in, and you can get it out by its hash, that's it. There are some bits (permanodes and claims) for a
7.
by eexan 6y ago
Very immature, just have a look at its extensive absent documentation. The best bit that describes the state of things: "If you're a programmer or fairly technical, you can probably get it up and running and get some utility out
8.
by eexan 6y ago
I tried perkeep a while ago. While the ideas are cool, the implementation is meh: I added a single 2.7G ubuntu iso - it took 5 minutes to ingest it (on a tmpfs!), and turned it into 45k(!) little chunks, wtf is up with that? At this rate in