On Feb 14, 2014, at 11:26 PM, Nick Sivo <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I can't recommend Tarsnap to others as a viable primary backup tool. > > Primary backups should always be on-premises, no? Nothing will be > faster than locally attached storage. That’s arguable if you’re not dealing with massive amounts of data (which I don’t consider 35 GB of uncompressed data to be). Network speed over a compressed tunnel would let us restore in under 20 minutes, compared to the (projected) 53 hours with Tarsnap. If our servers catch on fire, anything under an hour for a complete restore would be fine-ish. Tarsnap isn’t anywhere close to that. My point was rather that Tarsnap’s slowness isn’t intrinsic to it being a internet-based backup. Even for an off-site network backup, it’s extremely slow. -Scott
