| 1 |
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 2:32 PM Wol <antlists@××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 15/08/2022 11:11, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
> > I see lots of talk of NAS and zfs/btrfs and snapshots. IMO these are |
| 5 |
> > NOT really great solutions for backup. NAS can work of course but it |
| 6 |
> > is overkill for backup storage. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Do you want multiple *independent* backups, or do you want *incremental* |
| 9 |
> backups so you can go back in time. It's nice to have both, but |
| 10 |
> snapshotting gives you full backups for the price of incremental. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Snapshots don't give you backups at all, unless you first make a |
| 13 |
snapshot and then take a backup (full or incremental) of the snapshot, |
| 14 |
or serialize them using a send-like mechanism (which can also be full |
| 15 |
or incremental). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
If you destroy the drives containing the original copy, then you |
| 18 |
destroy all the snapshots as well. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
COW snapshots are great, but they're more about how you handle your |
| 21 |
LIVE data. They don't address the same failure modes as backups. I |
| 22 |
use both. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Rich |
Archives