Selfhosted
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
-
No spam posting.
-
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
-
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
-
No trolling.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
view the rest of the comments
I would generally argue that rsync is not a backup solution. But it is one of the best transfer/archiving solutions.
Yes, it is INCREDIBLY powerful and is often 90% of what people actually want/need. But to be an actual backup solution you still need infrastructure around that. Bare minimum is a crontab. But if you are actually backing something up (not just copying it to a local directory) then you need some logging/retry logic on top of that.
At which point you are building your own borg, as it were. Which, to be clear, is a great thing to do. But... backups are incredibly important and it is very much important to understand what a backup actually needs to be.
Yeah, if you want to use rsync specifically for backups, you're probably better-off using something like
rdiff-backup, which makes use of rsync to generate backups and store them efficiently, and drive it from something likebackupninja, which will run the task periodically and notify you if it fails.rsync: one-way synchronizationunison: bidirectional synchronizationgit: synchronization of text files with good interactive merging.rdiff-backup:rsync-based backups. I used to use this and moved torestic, as thebackupninjatarget forrdiff-backuphas kind of fallen into disrepair.That doesn't mean "don't use
rsync". I mean,rsync's a fine tool. It's just...not really a backup program on its own.Beware rdiff-backup. It certainly does turn rsync (not a backup program) into a backup program.
However, I used rdiff-backup in the past and it can be a bit problematic. If I remember correctly, every "snapshot" you keep in rdiff-backup uses as many inodes as the thing you are backing up. (Because every "file" in the snapshot is either a file or a hard link to an identical version of that file in another snapshot.) So this can be a problem if you store many snapshots of many files.
But it does make rsync a backup solution; a snapshot or a redundant copy is very useful, but it's not a backup.
(OTOH, rsync is still wonderful for large transfers.)
I think that you may be thinking of
rsnapshotrather thanrdiff-backupwhich has that behavior; both usersync.But I'm not sure why you'd be concerned about this behavior.
Are you worried about inode exhaustion on the destination filesystem?
Huh, I think you're right.
Before discovering ZFS, my previous backup solution was rdiff-backup. I have memories of it being problematic for me, but I may be wrong in my remembering of why it caused problems.