this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
27 points (96.6% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54716 readers
354 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I wouldn't.
Use a proper backup tool for this, like restic. BackBlaze has reasonable rates, especially of you're mostly write-only, and restic has built-in support for B2 and encrypts everything by default. It also supports compression, but you won't get much out of that on media files. restic is also cross-platform and a single executable, so you can throw binaries for OSX, Linux, and Windows on a USB stick and know you can get to your backups from anywhere. It also allows you to mount a remote repository like a filesystem (on Linux, at least), and browse a backup and get at individual files without having to restore everything. It's super handy if you screw up a single file or directory.
Second restic or Borg with a rclone sync to storage. Restic will handle both for you though. Borg is an option if you want a local back up that then gets synced (or use restic to do multiple backups)
I use B2 storage and it’s dirt cheap compared to other offerings. You can use rclone to mount the bucket locally and only recover what you need to save on egress costs.
The advantage of restic/borg is not only encryption but snapshots, deduplication, and compression over a simple rsync.
Rsync.net can run a Borg server if you want to back up to that but B2 is much more cost effective.
This is great additional information, much of which I didn't know!
I'm doing the backing-up-twice thing; it'd probably be better if I backed up once and rsync'd - it'd be less computationally intensive and save disk space used by multiple restic caches. OTOH, it'd also have more moving parts and be harder to manage, and IME things that I touch rarely need to be as simple as possible because I forget how to use them in between uses.
Anyway, great response!
For me i keep a local one so if I lose a file or something gets corrupted I can restore locally without any egress costs or network lag. The sync to remote is in case of local data loss for example fire or theft.
Rclone will (should) be faster than doing a restic sync due to not having to do any deduping etc.