BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] On Backups
- Subject: [Discuss] On Backups
- From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt)
- Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 11:47:33 -0400
- In-reply-to: <20240917170627.4575a8f8.Richard.Pieri@gmail.com>
- References: <20240917170627.4575a8f8.Richard.Pieri@gmail.com>
Rich Pieri said on Tue, 17 Sep 2024 17:06:27 -0400 >The deduplication discussion got me thinking about how I do backups of >my two "work" stations (read: where I play games, watch movies, and do >all my other not actually work things like writing this). I had been >using rsync to replicate data to my file server (ZFS, redundant >storage, etc.) but this really isn't efficient in total. I've been using rsync for over two decades and it's proven easy and restorable. But you used the word total... >So I went >looking at what cool options are available. I found a pair of programs >that do what I want: > >First is Relax-and-Recover, aka ReaR. It partitions and formats a USB >drive to be a bootable turn-key bare metal recovery device. It's >limited to recovering to identical hardware which is fine for me. >Emergency bare metal recovery is what I want from this aspect of >backups. I'll be adding this to my backup routine, if I can set it to only back up the system stuff, leaving the data to be backed up by rsync. > >Transparency: I have been using ReaR since January because it is bare >metal recovery in a more convenient form than Clonezilla. > >Second is restic. This is for file and filesystem recovery. There are >many similar programs: borg, rdiff-backup, etc., but what makes restic >stand out for me is the backups can be mounted as filesystems via FUSE. >Mounting a backup set and browsing it like any filesystem is absolutely >brilliant for restoring files. My rsync system already does this. All that's needed is to mount my backup drive read-only and copy off it. As a substitute for ReaR, up until now I've been keeping a text version of all the mounts, /etc/fstab, a text list of the results of lsblk, and a text list of all the *manually* installed packages. In practice, I only keep those up to date when I suspect they might be needed, so it's pretty clear why ReaR would be superior to my current OS restore system. Of course, on suspicion of need, I'll still *also* do my former stuff along with ReaR. Thanks for the tip! Following is a series of four backup articles I wrote over a span of more than a decade. The first one was written when I still used Windows, but all four maintain the same backup philosophy: * https://www.troubleshooters.com/tpromag/9807.htm * https://www.troubleshooters.com/lpm/200208/200208.htm * https://www.troubleshooters.com/lpm/200609/200609.htm * https://www.troubleshooters.com/lpm/201408/201408.htm SteveT Steve Litt http://444domains.com
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] On Backups
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)
- [Discuss] On Backups
- References:
- [Discuss] On Backups
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)
- [Discuss] On Backups
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] On Backups
- Next by Date: [Discuss] On Backups
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] On Backups
- Next by thread: [Discuss] On Backups
- Index(es):