On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 6:13 AM, Joost Roeleveld <jo...@antarean.org> wrote: > "app-backup/dar" uses catalogues for the incrementals. I think I will stick to > that for the foreseeable future. >
I used to use that and sarab (which is a wrapper). I moved on to duplicity. The problem with dar is that it uses quite a bit of RAM as the number of files being backed up grows I think. So, if you have 6TB full of multimedia it might not be a huge problem, but if you have 6TB full of portage trees good luck with that. The other problem with dar is that if a file changes it stores a complete copy of it. Duplicity uses librsync, so if a file changes it only stores the parts that actually changed. It also uses catalogs, and supports things like caching catalogs (so you don't need the last incremental mounted), and a bunch of storage backends (like S3). However, dar definitely is more useful than tar if you want the option for random access. Rich
