David Looney wrote:
Does anyone else but me find S3 backup painfully slow ? Somewhat awkward
too, as if you are encrypting, you're pretty much limited to doing
incremental backups on your end, otherwise everything changes in every
file necessitating monstrous upload time.  I also found some clients
couldn't cope with >2GB files, and had to split them up.

I find S3 to be fairly fast. It is restricted to my upload speed. From the colo I can backup at several megabytes per second. I use bacula to do the actual backups to file storage and then upload the bacula data files. It works pretty well as bacula handles the incrementals etc. I use s3sync to do the actual upload and it handles greater than 2G files just fine. S3 itself has a limit of 5G per file.

I can see using S3 for backing relatively small important files, but it
seems to me not to be well suited to use as an off-site complete system
backup.

I have around 50G or so in S3 at the moment. It does take ages to upload from home (cablemodem) but I don't really care. It does around a gig a day so over the course of a month it all makes it up there. I have a program which I have written which queries the bacula db for full volumes, uploads them, then deletes them from the local machine. I should publish that thing soon.


--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to