What application do you use for backups?

[Flupp]

I'm migrating our main production server from synology to truenas core and currently looking at backup options. I'm after something that can handle the versioning, like hyperbackup could, and target S3 compatible storage. Duplicati seems good. Are there any other comparable solutions out there? I'm happy to run it in a VM on our proxmox cluster so doesn't have to be in a jail.

 

[subnetspider]

I mainly use ZFS replication to a second TrueNAS CORE server and semi-manually do monthly offline backups.
Depending on how many files you have, you could also use syncthing or rsync to back up your files.

What you do for backups depends on how much you want to pay for it, how automated you want it to be, and so on.

 

[Flupp]

I've decided on using Rsync.net as it's ZFS based and let's me do zfs-send

 

[MrGuvernment]

Just to note, you do not have backups, unless you have tested restores.....

How are you validating the data copied is good..

 

[Davvo]

How are you validating the data copied is good..

It's the whole point of using ZFS.

 

[MrGuvernment]

It's the whole point of using ZFS.

So "Just trust it" then ?

I have seen a couple Ent. level backups tools (Dell EMC), not work on restores when backups said everything was dandy and golden, and they promised the world...so I tend to have hesitancy...

And if someone is backing up off TrueNAS to somewhere else that may not be using ZFS, then restoring and testing still should be done.

 

[NugentS]

Back to your original question - as you already have Synology devices that you are (to some extent) decomming.
Active Backup for Business will back up SMB (and NFS) Shares very nicely.

My backups - when I am not playing with them are:
1. Replication to another TrueNAS Server
2. SMB, NFS etc Backups via Active Backup to Synology

 

[Davvo]

So "Just trust it" then ?

As long as your data is on ZFS, you will know if it is intact. There are a few options that let you cloud-backup using ZFS: rsync.net is the first that comes to my mind.

 

[danb35]

As long as your data is on ZFS, you will know if it is intact.

I think the two of you are talking past each other. Yes, ZFS will guarantee that the data written to it won't be corrupted without its telling you (and fixing it if possible)--which is what you're saying. That doesn't mean that you'll have an effective way to restore that data to wherever you backed it up from, which I think is what @MrGuvernment is saying. Until you've validated that you can restore your backup, you don't really have a backup.

 

[MrGuvernment]

I think the two of you are talking past each other. Yes, ZFS will guarantee that the data written to it won't be corrupted without its telling you (and fixing it if possible)--which is what you're saying. That doesn't mean that you'll have an effective way to restore that data to wherever you backed it up from, which I think is what @MrGuvernment is saying. Until you've validated that you can restore your backup, you don't really have a backup.

Yup, this.

 

[Constantin]

Beyond being able to show that you can restore, also consider the need for multiple backups, ideally at different places in case your home/business/etc is destroyed. I’d suggest a location that is far enough away to allow for disasters while being close enough to make physical retrieval and local (hence much faster) restores possible. Hopefully, you won’t have to do this often, so even a location an hour or two away is OK.

I’m not a fan of online-only backup solutions for that reason. While I get the appeal / convenience of an online backup solution, the time it takes to get Comcast to transfer it under ideal circumstances is a deal breaker for me. Some online backup services offer to send you hard drive copies of your stored stuff if disaster strikes (for a princely fee, of course).

I also happen to like the ability of TrueNAS to snapshot, as that also helps deal with potential ransomeware problems. However, equally valid is having offline backups that you update and rotate. They just don’t tend to give you the same granularity re: when to roll-back to as snapshots potentially do.