casync VS Duplicati

For arbitrary state changes however, it's better to use something like casync. Note that there are a lot of tunables, implicit and explicit; for package indexing I would particularly think about "how is the index sorted" and "what is the desired chunk size".

If you just want something practical to play with, see casync. Even if it doesn't fit your workflow, or if you think you can do better, chances are you're best off building on top of it or adding patches to it, not starting from scratch.

You probably want casync.

Obligatory link to casync, which implements this better than most alternatives.

(personally, I think more people need to be aware of casync for the update storage/distribution problem. It isn't perfect for every use case, but it's good enough that you're probably better off wrapping/forking it rather than reimplementing it badly from scratch)

Does something like casync (https://github.com/systemd/casync or https://github.com/folbricht/desync) serve any purpose or provide any advantage to propagating rpm changes over rsync?

Software that comes to mind for syncing lots of small files: git (and other source versioning tools), casync (https://github.com/systemd/casync) and a go implementation (https://github.com/folbricht/desync). Not really an answer and I can't think of a way to shoehorn that into your workflow, but maybe it leads you down a useful road.

Casync – A Content-Addressable Data Synchronization Tool\ (15 comments)

Petabaytlarca veri emanet edilen şu kodun %85'i C# https://github.com/duplicati/duplicati

For my parents' computer, I'm using the canary version (which should be the alpha version I think?) of Duplicati since years.

It hasn't had a release in a little while but work is still occurring. https://github.com/duplicati/duplicati/actions.

Hey have a read at : https://github.com/duplicati/duplicati/issues/4041

I just came across this while looking through their issues to see if anyone else had reported the firefox issue i'm running into. I'm starting to have serious reservations.

I like duplicacy because of the way it keeps the chunks in the file system, without a special database. This makes it scale up really well no matter how many backups you have (you can even have multiple computers saved). It's kind of beyond weird how you select what you want to backup with the symlinks (using the command line version), looks more like what one would make for himself in a weekend (not that I'm complaining about free software!) but it's been without bugs for me and extremely efficient. In contrast duplicati has a perfect interface, it's well maintained and everything but bogs down in any large backup, has stories about people recovering for weeks for a very few local TBs and I've experienced for myself this, granted in the python that is checking the sha256 checksums of the backups but it makes it slower many times (possibly hundreds of times), nobody checked from 2013 to 2021 (or did it on tiny datasets like 1GB or was content to wait for weeks even on something small-ish)?