Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| scripts:backups_and_data [2022-04-12 19:08] – tony | scripts:backups_and_data [2022-06-03 20:42] (current) – technotony | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| ==== Borg ==== | ==== Borg ==== | ||
| - | I use Borg for my current active backup on my laptop. Since the laptop is only schoolwork, there isn't a ton of other files to copy. | + | [[scripts: |
| - | Borg has a few cool features: | + | ===== Parity ===== |
| - | * Incremental backups only copy the differences | + | |
| - | * Ability to mount the backups easily for recovery | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | For my desktop, I use good old tar files generally for system setup. All important data on this system is generally copied to one of many external drives. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | I used to use Syncthing, to sync files across my systems. I later switched to unison over ssh through my own VPN. I now just use rsync for simplicity and speed. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | I have various drives, some old, some new holding backups. Critical things like family documents are redundant on my drive, at least 2 externals, and an encrypted copy on Backblaze B2. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | Old drives with bad partitions are generally retired and become permanent backups after I load an important collection and leave it. I try to power them up twice a year to ensure they still work. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | I use PAR2 to create parity files. I do this for both TAR and ZPAQ. I have 2 options: use files/ | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | If I have to encrypt anything, I use AES256 with GPG. If there is a fault in AES, lets be real, everyone will be screwed anyways. | + | |
| + | [[scripts: | ||
| ===== Compression ===== | ===== Compression ===== | ||
| Line 42: | Line 29: | ||
| If you are low on space and don't care about CPU time, it's a journaled archive. Very good compression ratio. | If you are low on space and don't care about CPU time, it's a journaled archive. Very good compression ratio. | ||
| + | |||
| + | -m3 works fine for maybe-already compressed media like photos and videos you don't want to spend a year on. -m4 is great for more text based files. | ||
| + | |||
| + | zpaq a files.zpaq Documents/ -m4 | ||
| + | | ||
| + | -m5 takes an eternity, and is technically better but generally not worth it. (Bonus points for the RAM usage on a 16c32t system...) | ||
| ==== Dwarfs and Squashfs ==== | ==== Dwarfs and Squashfs ==== | ||
| Line 47: | Line 40: | ||
| These are read-only filesystems. you make them, and it's a compressed file, but it can be mounted. | These are read-only filesystems. you make them, and it's a compressed file, but it can be mounted. | ||
| - | Squashfs: pretty standard. used on many linux installer. similar ratio to tar. can use zstandard. not best radio, but deduplicated, | + | Squashfs: pretty standard. used on many linux installer. similar ratio to tar. can use zstandard. not best radio, but deduplicated, |
| - | Dwarfs: found it on github. faster then zpaq, better then squashfs. have not vetted source code though. use at your own risk. it is a cool device though. | + | For backup, borg also allows mounting, is deduplicated and compressed. Sqsh is just a "read only image" equivalent with compression. |
| + | Dwarfs: found it on github (by mhx?). faster then zpaq, better then squashfs. have not vetted source code though. use at your own risk. it is a cool FS though. | ||
| Line 80: | Line 74: | ||
| DVDs will get scratched and I currently leave ~5% parity to recover files. | DVDs will get scratched and I currently leave ~5% parity to recover files. | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | NOTE: Optical media for large backups doesn' | ||
| - | |||
