Selfhosted

60366 readers

566 users here now

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:

Detailed Rules Post

Be civil.
No spam.
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
Submission headline should match the article title.
No trolling.
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

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!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

curbstickle@anarchist.nexus

curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world

Can/should I just use a networked folder as a duplicati backup destination? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by batmaniam@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Stumbling through getting a proper backup regime in place. I have an unraid system running a proper array, and am trying to setup backups for two separate machines (one windows one debian). I've successfully setup a file share, and have duplicati running. Are there disadvantages to just setting the network folder as the destination for the backup? It seems a little hamfisted (and the data rates are terrible).

It seems like there's probably a better way to do this...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think you're asking about the Samba share? If it works, there's no real downside except the speed and general wonkiness of the SMB protocol.

As I would rank the different options:

Rsync+SSH would be fastest if you're sending entire directories and not packaging first. A bit slower if sending huge files.
NFS would be fastest if sending prepackaged large files, but overall slower if sending a bunch of smaller files
SMB will be slowest in any scenario, but may be easier for you

[–] batmaniam@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

This is really helpful thank you! I think it's samba share? Whatever Unraid has just baked in and calls "shares".

Googling rsync that looks like it'll work, and faster is better!

While I do want true backups of a few drives (as in: if a drive fails, restore the backup to a new drive, physically swap it out, and you're good to go), the majority of the data I'm just looking to have it "backed up" (as in: all of the files are present in more than one location). The majority of the data is ~18TB of media for my plex server. My unraid is: 1x 2TB, 1x 10TB, 1x20TB and 1x20TB(parity). It sounds like Rsync-ing the 20TB drive with my plex media and the 20TB unraid disk would get me what I need?

Thanks for the pointers, getting a few things to google is incredibly helpful.

[–] HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

SMB isn't really all that slow these days.

I have NFS and SMB shares set up (same directory) and copying files to/from them maxes out my gigabit LAN.

SSH on the other hand is slower, because there's more CPU overhead.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

All data and benchmarks would disagree with you. If you find something showing that SMB isn't slower than the others mentioned, I'd love to see it.

[–] Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I disagree with the other person, rsync + ssh is faster even in my own benchmarks. But samba is plenty fast enough these days, I can easily have it max out my gigabit network so I don't need anything faster. So for me (and I would guess the majority of people) speed really isn't a concern anymore, so I use samba because it's easy to use and it makes sharing network folders to anything else a breeze.

It's like phones. Yeah technically the newest iPhone is faster than this years budget Samsung. But when's the last time your phone was actually a bottleneck? (Unless you're one of those people who play games, in which case, actually please respond cause I could use some really nice idle city builders for my phone pls)

[–] HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Real world usage tells me all I need to know.