Re: Storage server

[Veljko <veljko3@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:41:04AM +0200, Denis Witt wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 17:38:22 +0200
> Veljko <veljko3@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Any particular reason for avoiding rsnapshot? What are advantages of
> > using rdiff-backup or obnam?
> 
> Hi Veljko,
> 
> I don't know a reason why someone should avoid rsnapshot. rdiff-backup
> is very similar to rsnapshot but handles the backup generations
> differently. rsnapshot always backup whole files (and uses hardlinks
> if a file didn't change). rdiff-backup just save the newest backup as
> normal files, every older version is stored as compressed delta. If you
> have to backup large files like databases or huge logfiles rdiff-backup
> will save you a lot of diskspace doing so (which is for me the biggest
> advantage of rdiff-backup). On the other hand it takes much longer to
> restore an old rdiff-backup than an rsnapshot one.
> 
> rdiff-backup is a bit more flexible when it comes to decide when
> to delete old backups. rsnapshot has a fixed scheme. rdiff-backup has 
> a command you can trigger manually (or by a script when the diskspace
> is running low). So, for example, you can guarantee your users that
> there will be a backup for at least 7 days but in fact keep files as
> long as there is diskspace available. 
> 
> rdiff-backup stores metadata (such as ownership) separately. rsnapshot
> just keep the settings the file has.
> 
> rsnapshot have a larger user basis, so you might can expect some
> more support if you're running into problems.
> 
> obnam uses a completely different approach. Everything is stored in a
> repository. It has some nice features but last time I had a look I
> decided against using it (but I can't remember exactly why) so I can't
> tell much about it.
> 
> bup is very interesting but at the moment not mature enough to be used,
> IMHO. Also there is (at the moment) no function to delete old backups,
> so if you're running out of diskspace you have to buy new hardware.
> 
> I'm using rsnapshot for most of my backup needs. It's very easy to use
> and understand.
> 
> Best regards
> Denis Witt

Hi, Denis!

Thanks for your valuable input. So, in case I have to backup lot of
small files and only some of them are changed I should go with
rsnapshot. If there are big text files that changes through time, I
should go with rdiff-backup.

Would it be reasonable to use them both where appropriate or thats just
unnecessary complexity? 

Regards,
Veljko