|
clockworkjoe posted:I made the mistake of using Bitcasa as an online backup service. http://venturebeat.com/2016/04/21/bitcasa-killing-drive-cloud-storage-service-on-may-20-will-focus-on-growing-platform-business/ What are your needs other than syncing the data to the cloud? Do you need past versions? Do you need to be able to upload to the cloud from one system and then sync it down to another? What about the ability to restore large amounts of data at once?
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 01:11 |
|
|
Just pick one of the big three personal backups. Carbonite, crash plan, back blaze.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:Is there a service that lets me set something like only upload X gigs a day or something like that? Nope, not that I know of, unless you do some kind of roll your own thing where you upload to amazon S3 or something.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:I got a Veeam question I hope someone can help clarify. I don't know if the salesguy I dealt with hosed up, or we just had a weird misunderstanding or what. He just had a kid so he's out of the office for a week, and I'm not going to push the issue with him until he's back. My general experience with sales guys will be that they'll say "of course that will work!" The good ones might do some rudimentary fact checking. The greedy ones will not. The nuances will not be considered. Might want to check with their Support as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
TomWaitsForNoMan posted:I've been using Crashplan at home for about a week and it's been horrifically slow to upload my data. I have 15Mbps upload on my line but Crashplan is stuck at 1.5, even with zero throttling set in the application. At this rate it's going to be a long time before all my stuff (less than a terabyte) is uploaded. It's not uncommon for those cheap, unlimited consumer backups to have some kind of upload throttling in place. Most of them don't throttle downloads though. I don't know for sure if Crashplan has throttling, but I think they do. Carbonite used to throttle heavily, but recently (last year) removed upload throttles for their personal plans. Or raised the max speed cap significantly. Something like that. It's pretty good now. Geolocation can matter too, since most of these services use US-based datacenters. The latency involved in connecting and uploading each chunk of data can cause pretty big slowdown for international customers. Again, I can't comment if that's affecting you, but it's probably not helping.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
GreenBuckanneer posted:Carbonite Server Backup doesn't really have a limit per se, but I doubt you'll ever reach it outside of using google fiber or hardware bandwidth capacities for your machine. Oh yeah, the server backup has been able to saturate literally every connection I've thrown at it, including transfers from AWS systems to Amazon S3 storage. As long as you save your backups locally first, it will upload as fast as your network allows. I've seen multiple Gbps. GreenBuckanneer posted:On that note, if you are into Tape backups (or BYOC), you should totally get your hands dirty with the Zmanda product, it's awesome and has been around for 20 years. gently caress tapes. I understand their purpose, but holy gently caress does it lead to some convoluted backup schemes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Do you mean Towers of Hanoi or incremental? They seem pretty simple to me? Oh neither of those are complex on their own. They can get complicated if you have convoluted retention schemes with backups that span multiple tapes, which does confuse people. But worse, too many people will try to (for lack of a better term) 'game the system' for some minor cost savings in the number of tapes they need. They attempt to reuse tapes, try fit incrementals on tapes that are already partially used, and try to set up little partial cycles of differential + incremental backups that are deleted after the next differential takes place. Most backup programs will manage things for you, but I've seen dozens and dozens of cases where they just would not let it lie. They would not buy the one more tape they really need in favor of trying to much things up manually.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
There's a big difference between cloud storage/sync services like Dropbox and the backup services discussed in this thread. The storage services are all about having your data right there available quickly and easily between devices. I'd say there's some potential for malicious fuckery there. The backup services are all about storing your files in a protected manner. Most use some form of encryption, and most of those also offer some kind of private key encryption. There's still some potential for malicious fuckery, but if you use a private key to encrypt, you're unlikely to have any information taken in a format usable to the fuckers who stole it. In the end, though, it really comes down to weighing your risks. Is your time and effort in getting drives, rotating drives, taking the drives to a bank, and doing all that in a rotation worth more or less than the possible risk of maybe something bad happening to your cloud backups? Only you can decide. Most will go the way of convenience.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
unknown posted:Okay, a question if Acronis (Cloud) is really as crappy as I've come to think... I can't speak to their cloud offerings. It sounds plausible, though. I'm not a fan of Acronis. Their custom VSS Provider has issues. Most notably, it can cause a number of problems with non-Acronis backup software. Example: https://social.technet.microsoft.co...um=winservergen That post is five years old. I ran into the same issue last week. They haven't fixed it. It's been around so long that I've often wondered if they deliberately don't fix it. Maybe because it makes people less likely to switch away from Acronis? Think about it. Other products are likely to fail backups for weird and esoteric reasons as long as Acronis is installed. So someone who's thinking about switching probably won't, unless they figure it out. As for what can replace Acronis: What are you trying to do? What are your requirements? Simple file backup? Bare metal? Any databases involved? Exchange?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
unknown posted:Bare metal is really what I want, but we only have access to the windows VM, not the host, so I can't just power it down and copy the storage to our systems. Carbonite Server Backup could do what you want, including backing up to network storage and/or cloud locations. I believe their bare metal solution requires something locally (network storage is cool), though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
I'd be very, very afraid to run a rebuild on that array. It'll get three days into the rebuild and then implode.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Tape drives going offline usually indicates a hardware problem or a fundamental incompatibility between the tape drive and the system it's attached to. In my experience, it's rarely the backup software at fault. Since the VM host is a windows box, check your system events. Might also contact the hardware vendor for the tape drive and see what they think. Edit: Especially if multiple programs can't see the drive once it goes offline. That strongly suggests there's something wrong with the tape drive itself. ConfusedUs fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Dec 9, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
Any of the major players will do that, with some restrictions based on what OS you use. There may be some oddities based on if that drive is disconnected a lot or gets a new drive letter, but what you described is literally the point of consumer cloud backup. Crash plan, carbonite, back blaze, etc
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 10:47
|
|
|
I don't like the suggestion for Dropbox or Onedrive as a backup solution. The single largest risk to your files is a crypto virus of some sort, where your files get encrypted. All of the solutions mentioned here will notice those files got changed/encrypted and happily upload the encrypted ones. The true backup solutions (crashplan, etc) will allow you to revert, en masse, to the pre-encrypted versions. You might have to call their support*, they can do it. The file sharing solutions (dropbox, google drive, etc) don't have that mass reversion option (unless that's changed in the last 6 months since I last did a deep look into it). *Carbonite can mass revert you if you call support, but Crashplan can do it natively in the client. I honestly prefer Crashplan. -Blackadder- posted:I've heard good things about Crashplan as well, but how accessible are the files once I've uploaded them to their server? Is it a hassle to get them off individually? Is it easy to make small additions to the files I have? All of these services will automatically back up any changes to the files you make. Download/restore is generally simple. I strongly suggest you just try a few to see which you like, but note that they may not play nice together if you have more than one installed simultaneously.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
No clue. I've never used it. Sorry bro.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
I can't speak to Macrium itself, but in general you want a copy of your backups to be offsite and not actively connected to your network. There are plenty of backup suites out there now that will back up your devices to both local disk and to an offsite cloud location. Crypto viruses are getting smarter every day, so you really don't want your backups on the same network if you can help it at all. Nothing sucks more than finding out all your backups are encrypted, even those you thought were safe. Limiting access to your stored backups will reduce (but not eliminate) the chance of something getting in there and trashing them. You really want to have no access at all. For example, firewalls are only as good as the rules you create and don't necessarily protect against certain exploits.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
They had the best consumer client by a mile, and I'm really sad to see them go. I first heard about this yesterday morning, and after the initial shock wore off, I have to say the big surprise is that they're exiting entirely. I expected a price hike in their near-to-mid future rather than a full exit from the consumer backup space. The ability back up network locations, the cheap family plans, their unlimited versioning, and all those other goodies were super great to have, but I've long wondered at their cost effectiveness. There comes a point where "unlimited" on the customer side stops making economic sense on the provider side. All of those nice things they offered undoubtedly edged them closer and closer to that line. And, in my experience, the people who buy based on those features tend to have quite a bit more data than those who don't need them. I've seen the data. That's a fairly vicious feedback loop. It just blows me away that their answer is "goodbye" rather than charging extra for those features (or something along those lines).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Sheep posted:As you said Crashplan's client was the best by a wide margin, I cringe at the thought of having to use Carbonite. Carbonite's Windows client is pretty solid, but it's very much geared towards the lowest common denominator. There are few options to configure.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
ymgve posted:Anyone got experience with Backblaze? Pricing seems reasonable as long as I only need to back up 3 systems. They're fine. Their biggest downside is the 30 day retention, which is quite aggressive in this space. If you get a crypto virus, better hope you notice within those 30 days. ---- The various consumer level backups are all more or less interchangeable in terms of the service they provide. Some offer this feature, some offer that one, but that's about the extent of the differences. From a technical perspective they all do approximately the same thing using approximately the same technology. Crashplan always won in the features department, Carbonite wins in the simplicity department, and Backblaze is somewhere between the two. The answer to "is <insert any top consumer continuous backup level service> okay?" is always: Yes, if they have the features you need and are in the price bracket you can afford.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Furism posted:
The reason isn't technical. It's money. If you allow ad hoc selection of directories, you drastically increase the number of files stored in the service.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Furism posted:Are you saying they put that restriction in place to make it harder for people to use up all of their (free or paid-for) storage space unless they move it to a place potentially inconvenient (the root folder of the application) ? Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. If they give out 10GB free and most people only use 1GB of it, then it costs them less than if the average usage was 9GB. Same for the 10TB thing. Ten TB is ludicrously high. Only a tiny fraction of potential users are even capable of hitting that amount. It might as well be "unlimited" with a cap to stop that one guy in a million who wants to upload a petabyte. They budget and set pricing with that knowledge in mind, and they must keep usage below the budgeted level or it is no longer profitable. And you can even use the 10TB feature as a marketing point. "Look at this amazing value! Ten whole terabytes for $x year. No one else offers that!" If you make it too easy for customers to back up too much data to your "unlimited" (or near equivalent) service, then they will take advantage of it. And if they take too much advantage of it, it's no longer profitable. I guarantee that's what happened to Crashplan. To much data, not enough revenue, and they couldn't price themselves higher in the consumer space without losing to their cheaper alternatives. Their "exit" is essentially them dumping everyone except those who are willing to pay small business prices for the feature set that got them into this predicament in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
GuyGizmo posted:
Uh, it should upload any file you select of any type. It just doesn't pick certain media files by default. If you're experiencing otherwise, call support.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
LastPass, and Carbonite or Backblaze
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
I would expect it to work, based on the text you have given, but I've not explicitly tried that. Although, if the Windows VM you're talking about is on the same physical host as your other VMs that you'll be backing up, I'd give the idea a second thought because you really don't want to back up to the same physical machine if at all possible.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
Nope, but feel free to talk about your issues anyway. A surprising amount of backup issues are generic and not software-specific. In fact, in my experience, I'd be comfortable claiming that *most* backup issues can be traced back to either problems with the system(s) being backed up, or with the software lacking proper handling for a problem with the system(s) being backed up. In other words, usually poo poo Be Broke and fixing it fixes the backup problems too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
ChubbyThePhat posted:Currently fighting with app-consistent backups failing and falling back to crash-consistent instead. TECHNICALLY not a big deal as it's just a transient warning that doesn't trigger every time the backup runs, but I LIKE MY poo poo TO WORK RIGHT. What apps and OS? Are we talking Windows and SQL/Exchange/etc?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
ChubbyThePhat posted:Windows and a whole shitload of different apps. I work at an MSP so I get the special version of backup hell where I don't actually know some of the things I am backing up. Guarantee you have at least one of the following happening: 1) One or more VSS Writers for the apps in question are in an unstable/failed state for whatever reason. There are a bazillion reasons this could be happening. Refer to your event logs on both host and guest OS, but usually guest. 2) The system is unable to create a snapshot for whatever reason. Most often, one or more of the systems involved does not have shadowstorage space configured on one or more drives where a backup is being performed. More rarely, there isn't *enough* shadowstorage space. Even more rarely, there are health or performance problems with the disk. Some of these things may appear in your System event logs. 3) For SQL Server, Exchange, or Sharepoint, you have more than one backup source backing up at least one database within your instance(s). This causes incremental/differential backups to fail because the database is not in the same state it was last time the backup application touched it. Full backups usually work, though. Can be the cause for failed/unstable writers I mentioned in #1. (I can explain more if you aren't familiar with this behavior.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
ChubbyThePhat posted:VSS writers were my first assumption as well. Further digging is starting to point to vCenter dicking with the snapshots being taken. The real trick here is that it looks like in every instance it is a different cause. I'm going to go back to the top of my list and slowly work down and fix one at a time rather than my previous attempt at grouping them together (to try and tackle this issue by issue rather than server by server). Issue by issue is probably the correct method. #2 on my list could lead to some consolidated fixes for multiple issues, but #1 and #3 are likely to be case-by-case
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:I'm also coming up on the end of my Crashplan subscription, and am switching over to Duplicati + B2. I was wondering if anyone had any advice on doing that first huge upload. My upload speed is usually around 1 Mbit / s, and I have around a terabyte to upload (spread out over 4 devices), which is 11.5 days of constant backing up. And really its even worse than that, because whenever I use the full 1 Mbit / s it completely demolishes my (shared) internet, so realistically I'm probably looking at around a month total backup time. The phrase you're looking for is "seeding." I'm not aware of any consumer-level backup services that offer it. It's exclusively a business-level feature. Post if you discover one, I'm sure that service will immediately be bombarded with all the 5TB+ "home" users fleeing Crashplan who can't find a new home. Edit: As an example, Blackblaze B2 offers "Fireball" seeding for $550 + $75 shipping + $3,000 refundable deposit
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2018 01:57
|
|
|
It really depends on how that product handles indexing and such. Is the index local, and can be transferred over? Is it uploaded, and can be brought down? I don’t know that product well enough to answer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 01:11 |
|
|
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-stats-for-2017/
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2018 19:52
|
|