tarsnap VS Duplicati

Tarsnap for configs and critical stuff (password database, emails).

Someone does :)

https://tarsnap.com

> Tarsnap uses a prepaid model based on actual usage:

> Storage: 250 picodollars / byte-month of encoded data

Colin Percival's tarsnap

In past threads, people have mentioned enjoying my Tarsnap (https://github.com/Tarsnap/tarsnap) code. I personally think that the spiped (https://github.com/Tarsnap/spiped) code is even better.

I prefer Vorta myself ( https://github.com/borgbase/vorta ) as it also has incremental and encrypted backups, as well as being a fraction of the price, but tarsnap seems to still be in very-slow development: https://github.com/Tarsnap/tarsnap , so I'd say from a quick look it's still trustworthy.

Each server also upload their configs and « important » data (my mails and git repos) to tarsnap 3. Tarsnap storage is not as cheap as B2, so I try not to upload too much data there, but it's reliable and easy to use. It was also my first backup solution, and barely cost me 10$ a year so I keep it as a secondary backup.

Not foolish! The Tarsnap client code is open source, but the license file prohibits anyone from using the code: https://github.com/Tarsnap/tarsnap/blob/master/COPYING

> Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, without modification,

Yes. For the curious,

https://github.com/Tarsnap/tarsnap/graphs/contributors

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)?