Linode Forum
Linode Community Forums
 FAQFAQ    SearchSearch    MembersMembers      Register Register 
 LoginLogin [ Anonymous ] 
Post new topic  Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Backup options
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:34 am 
Offline
Senior Newbie

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:17 pm
Posts: 12
Hi I have 3 Linodes, I use a Vmware debian r-snapshot server at home to back them all up.

What could be a good option to backup my entire home PC along with my linodes data? there is in total about 500GB.

Im in Korea and have fast net! One of my linodes is in Japan and I would just get another Linode box in Japan but I would like to spread things out.

Is there any online storage that people could recommend?

Cheers


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 2:15 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 7:47 pm
Posts: 1970
Website: http://www.rwky.net
Location: Earth
I dump to a tar file and store on amazon S3. It's easy and cheap.

_________________
Paid support
How to ask for help
1. Give details of your problem
2. Post any errors
3. Post relevant logs.
4. Don't hide details i.e. your domain, it just makes things harder
5. Be polite or you'll be eaten by a grue


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 2:19 pm 
Offline
Senior Newbie

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:17 pm
Posts: 12
Hi thanks, yep I looked more and s3 is the best option.
Im backing up to home and then using cloudberry to backup my entire home computer to s3


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 2:24 pm 
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Posts: 29
Glacier is (or will be) an option.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:44 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 1691
Location: Montreal, QC
Backing up your home: BackBlaze. The idea that anybody would consider S3 cheap for this is laughable: S3 would charge $62.50 per month just to store that 500 gigs, and there would be any bandwidth and IO charges on top of that.

BackBlaze is $3.96 a month (in a lump payment, $5/mth otherwise), and provides unlimited storage for a single machine. The downside? Windows and OS X only (and it won't do network drives), so it's really just meant for desktops and workstations, not servers. So it's not going to back up your linode.

Glacier does look interesting, though. 500GB would be $5/mth to store. Additional charges (retrieval fees, bandwidth fees, early deletion fees) would probably add another buck or two. But it's definitely MUCH cheaper than S3. Still not as cheap as backblaze, which also comes with all the client software...


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:59 am 
Offline
Senior Newbie

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:17 pm
Posts: 12
Yep it can get expensive

S3 Reduced Redundancy Storage cuts it down by 30%

I think many of these smaller backup providers could go but or get hacked so I might do a full full terabyte backup with someone like you mentioned but For $20 per month keep my ~100gb of business critical data at amazon


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:08 am 
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 4:19 pm
Posts: 41
Guspaz wrote:
Backing up your home: BackBlaze. The idea that anybody would consider S3 cheap for this is laughable: S3 would charge $62.50 per month just to store that 500 gigs, and there would be any bandwidth and IO charges on top of that.

BackBlaze is $3.96 a month (in a lump payment, $5/mth otherwise), and provides unlimited storage for a single machine. The downside? Windows and OS X only (and it won't do network drives), so it's really just meant for desktops and workstations, not servers. So it's not going to back up your linode.

Glacier does look interesting, though. 500GB would be $5/mth to store. Additional charges (retrieval fees, bandwidth fees, early deletion fees) would probably add another buck or two. But it's definitely MUCH cheaper than S3. Still not as cheap as backblaze, which also comes with all the client software...


Instead of BackBlaze, look into CrashPlan. It supports Windows and OS X and Linux. Instead of $3.96/mo per machine it's $6/mo for up to 10 machines and unlimited backup space. If your home internet connection isn't the fastest, you can pay extra and seed the backup with a hard drive by mail. I don't work for them, but I do use them at home to backup three Macs and one Linux media server.

(I don't and wouldn't use it for backing up web servers since I prefer to manage that on a more stringent [and at times, manual] basis.)


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:57 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 1691
Location: Montreal, QC
$6 is the four year price, it should be noted. It seems to be a tradeoff. BackBlaze is much simpler to use and much faster (without any throughput issues) with better customer support and a native client (CrashPlan is Java), but CrashPlan has Linux support, cheaper for multiple computers, supports local backups, and seed disks.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:37 am 
Offline
Senior Newbie

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:44 pm
Posts: 8
A couple of choices to consider, depending on your cost v.s. effort tolerance, that are slightly different than what you asked, but are my personal preference, and what I do now.

All involve using BackBlaze to backup your Windows home machine. There are several choices for the Linode Linux backups:
  1. Purchase Linode's Backup for each Linode (what I do now);
  2. Write your own backup (rsync via cron, which is what I did on DreamHost VPS just before I moved here to Linode) between your Linodes, but that probably says you should move one of the linodes to another data centre, rather than having them all in the Japanese data centre;
  3. Backup from Linode to your Windows machine (probably have to be incrementally even with a very fast Internet connection) where BackBlaze will do the rest so long as the backup file is in a Windows directory and isn't too, too big (which is what I used to do before DreamHost)

I have about 1.2TB at BackBlaze now, all from a single Windows machine, for $50/year.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2012 11:18 am 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 315
Website: http://www.jebblue.net
jonradio wrote:
I have about 1.2TB at BackBlaze now, all from a single Windows machine, for $50/year.



http://www.quora.com/Backblaze/Is-Linux ... -Backblaze


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:10 pm 
Offline
Senior Newbie

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:44 pm
Posts: 8
jebblue is correct to say that BackBlaze does not support Linux, but I have successfully placed Linux backups, even something as simple as a .tar.gz file, into a Windows directory on my home computer and had BackBlaze back it up.

The key things to investigate about BackBlaze are:
  1. Be sure you have reviewed and corrected the default settings of File Extensions that are excluded from backup
  2. Determine the current maximum file size exclusion (it has changed since BackBlaze started) and either break up any larger files you might create for backup or make other arrangements
  3. Make sure you know exactly how a Restore will work for your situation. And test it.
The last point is probably the most important. It works both ways. Downloading a lot of data does take a long time. But, for nearly all Internet connections, downloading is faster than uploading, often by a factor of 10 or more.

On the other hand, some data needs to be restored more quickly than other data. And some data does not need to be backed up at all, let alone restored from BackBlaze. For example, the vast majority of my linode disk space is files that are part of the Linode install packages. Although it is more convenient, I probably don't have to back them up at all, just so long as I backup the settings I've changed and the actual contents of my web site, though even my web sites have lots of "system files" I will get if I reinstall the software.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:13 pm 
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 4:19 pm
Posts: 41
Guspaz wrote:
$6 is the four year price, it should be noted. It seems to be a tradeoff. BackBlaze is much simpler to use and much faster (without any throughput issues) with better customer support and a native client (CrashPlan is Java), but CrashPlan has Linux support, cheaper for multiple computers, supports local backups, and seed disks.


Correct, I should have mentioned that you need to prepay for a significant period of time to get the cheaper price.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:45 am 
Offline
Senior Newbie

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:17 pm
Posts: 12
Hi all useful info cheers

How many Mbps do you average uploading to BackBlaze?


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:05 am 
Offline
Senior Newbie

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:44 pm
Posts: 8
webconcepts wrote:
Hi all useful info cheers

How many Mbps do you average uploading to BackBlaze?

I get well over my rated ISP upload speed (5Mbps) because BackBlaze does compression before it transmits.

They offer a throughput test here:
http://www.backblaze.com/speedtest/

But, again, expect more given their compression.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Backup options
PostPosted: Fri May 02, 2014 2:48 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 1691
Location: Montreal, QC
Nope.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
RSS

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group