If it's free and open source and it's also software, it can be discussed here. Subcommunity of Technology.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
There is no such thing as the objectively best solution. Each tool has advantages and disadvantages. And every user has different preferences and requirements.
Personally, I am using Borg for years. And I have had to restore data several times, which has worked every time.
In addition to Borg, you can also look at Borgmatic. This wrapper extends the functionality and makes some things easier.
And if you want to use a graphical user interface, you can have a look at Vorta or Pika.
I use restic. For local backups, Timeshift.
Seconded, I use restic with a remote blob storage and works nicely
Using borg backup, just because there are some nice frontends for the gnome ecosystem (when I am using gnome, I love to use gnome apps), and it has a nice cmd for scripting when using something else (using it on servers)
I don't have backups. :/
And I will regret it some day.
There are two kinds of people.
Those who make backups and those who will.
You very much will. It's easier than you'd think.
Kopia has served me great. I back up to my local Ceph S3 storage and then keep a second clone of that on a raid.
Kopiahas good performance and miltiple hosts can back up tp it concurrently while preserving deduplication -- unlike borgbackup.
Kopia has been working great for me as well. It's simple, versatile and reliable. I previously used Duplicati but kept running into jobs failing for no reason, backup configurations missing randomly and simple restores taking hours. It was a hot mess and I'm happy I switched.
I want to love kopia but the command line syntax feels unnatural to me. I don't know why either. For the whole month I test drove it, I had to look up every single time how to do something. Contrast this with restic which is less featureful in some ways but a few days in it felt like I was just using git.
I never used the command line with Kopia besides starting it up in server mode and used the web based GUI to configure, it was pretty simple to get everything setup that way. You may want to give it another try using Kopia in that mode.
My use case is for headless machines which makes it a no go in that regard unfortunately.
You can use the web ui remotely.
Personally I use it from command line, though, and my only complaint is that it's too easy to start a backup you didn't intend to.. Buut if you're careful about usong the kopia snapshot command then it's fine.
Oh I thought the webui was only for server mode.
I just quickly glanced through the manuals of both restic and kopia. I think my trouble with kopia is that its style feels kind of weird. I'm just not able to wrap my head around it well.
kopia snapshot create /dir is shorter but more confusing than restic -r repo backup /dir
I've been using Kopia on my desktop computer for a few years now to do cloud backups. It's generally working well and I haven't found anything else with the same combination of features yet.
That said, kopia-ui is still a bit finicky and I've managed to bork a repo beyond repair a few times (e.g. once because my cloud provider account ran out of space, leading to some kind of inconsistent state) and there are some oddities, like the regular "periodic maintenance" (it's a bit weird that it's needed in the first place) randomly failing or taking forever.
I've been using restic. It has built-in dedup & encryption and supports both local and remote storage. I'm using it to back up to a local restic-server (pointing to a USB drive) and Backblaze B2.
Restores for single or small sets of files is easy: restic -r $REPO mount /mnt Then browse through the filesystem view of your snapshots and copy just like any other filesystem.
I use btrfs snapshots and btrbk
btrfs is a great filesystem and btrbk complements it easily. Switching between snapshots is also really easy if something goes wrong and you need to restore.
Archwiki docs for btrfs: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Btrfs#Incremental_backup_to_external_drive
Of course you'd still want a remote location to backup to. You can use an encrypted volume with cloud storage. So google drive, etc all work.
I started using Timeshift when it was included with a distro I was using and haven't had reason to shift away from it. Have already used it once to do a full restore.
Rsync is great but if you want snapshots and file history rsnapshot works pretty well. It's based on rsync but for every sync it creates shortcuts for existing files and only copies changes and new files. It saves space and remains transparent for the user. FreeFileSync is also amazing
I just use rsync to backup my home folder to my NAS.
I like pikabackup it’s based on borg
Yeah, this is what I've found to be the best option. The encryption and deduplication is great.
What problem are you trying to solve? Please think about that, and about your backup strategy, before you decide on any specific tools.
For example, here are several scenarios that I guard against in my backup strategy:
I use NixOS so all my system configuration is already saved in my NixOS configs, which I save on GitHub. For dotfiles that aren't managed by NixOS I use syncthing to sync them between my devices, but no real backup cause I can just remake them if I need to, and things like my Neovim and VSCode configs are managed by my NixOS configs so they're backed up as well.
I've tried alternatives but I've stuck with LuckyBackup even though there have not been any updates for a while:
I've used Borg for years now. It's been rock solid. I test my backups regularly and have done several actual recoveries. I trust it with my data, which is the best thing I can say about backup software.
Multiple. Locally I have Timeshift doing btrfs snapshots every so often. This is mostly to roll back to a snapshot if something breaks. I've never had to use it (and probably should).
I use Pika backup every once in a while for a local backup to an external drive. Mostly because it's easy to restore quickly.
I have duplicacy doing backups to a cloud provider. I used to use duplicati for this, and it was fine - although I didn't like that it seems to be forever in beta. I like that duplicacy can do deduplication between backups of different machines which most other solutions I've seen cannot. I like its selection of cloud providers vs Borg/Vorta and some others.
I'm currently working on a disaster recovery plan using fsarchiver. I have very limited experience with it so far, but it had the features and social proof I was looking for.
I have so far used it to create offline filesystem backups of two volumes, one was LUKS encrypted (has to be manually "opened" with cryptsetup).
It can backup live filesystems which was important to me.
It's early days for my experience with this, but I'm sure others have used it and might chime in.
I am old school. I just use GNU Tar with the Pax format and multiple external detachable encypted hard drives. Reason is it is simple and a well known tool that is very common with a standard archive format.
I'm curious - how much data are you backing up with that method and how frequently are you doing your backups? Doesn't sound like it would scale well, but I'm also wondering if maybe this is perfect and I've justbeenoverthinking it.
There is not a size limit. Lot of these other methods actually use GNU Tar behind the scenes anyway. More then that GNU tar has been used for decades for this purpose. Pull out any Unix book from 2 decades ago and you will see "tar", "cpio", and "dump/restore" as the way. The new tool out there is Pax and in fact GNU Tar supports the new "pax" format. Moreover GNU Tar with Pax format can backup almost full disk structure including hard links, ACLs, and extended attributes which a lot of tools do not do. It is still useful to archive some things at a lower level like your partition table, and boot blocks of course. You also have to decide what run-level (such as rescue) you want to archive in, and/or what services you should stop, or provide separate to file system dumps for depending on your system. Databases, and things like ecryptfs take some special thought (thought it does for any tool). It is also good to do test restores to verify your disaster plan.
I use tar on many systems. My workstation is about 1TB of data. Backup is about 11 hours though I think it could be faster if I disabled compression (I currently use the standard gzip compression which is not optimal). I think the process is CPU bound by the compression at the moment. Going to uncompressed or using parallel gzip at level 2 is probably the fastest you can do and should really speed things up by 4X or more. I have played with this some for my wife and her raw backup is a lot faster now. My wife uses USB 3 external drives specifically plugged into USB 3 ports (the one with the SS symbol and the blue interior), and with a USB 3 related cable. I use 6TB naked SATA drives I insert into a hot mount enclosure and store in storage boxes. My backup system can theoretically do incrementals too, but it has some issues since I have moved to BTRFS so I do not use that at the moment. Did always use before. I have an idea how to fix, but need to debug and test incrementals now.
How often: I backup monthly. When my incrementals were working I use to do it weekly or whenever I got nervous. Other option for the BTRFS file systems would be to use their native backup tools. Not sure though, I like to use generic stuff. Lot to be said for generic.
Big downside of tar is the mind numbing man page. Getting the options correct takes some real thought. You also have to be comfortable with the shell and Bash scripting. Big upside you can customize exactly what you want.
tar dates all the way back to the 70s.
Yes, I actually did not know how far back, thanks. Wikipedia seems to say 1979. I know my system admin book dated 1992 talks about it and it was common then. I think my brother use to use it in the early 1980s for his job and maybe I did too a few times. Wikipedia says GNU Tar is newer and traces back to 1987. The formats have changed some and there are several. The PAX format is much newer which I think was standardized in 2001 but GNU Tar would have taken time to implement it. I do not know that date.
People seem to forget that tar worked well back then and still does.
I had the chance to play with late 70s Unix for a bit a few years ago. (Hardware on loan from a museum.) VERY minimal, but still recognizable. (Well, my Unix reflexes are old - I started in the mid 80s.)
Interesting. About then I was using a VAX. Somehow I spend most of my time on other stuff until I switched to Linux around 2000.
I use my own scripts with rsync etc, I don't back up my OS itself since I have installing it automated with scripts as well. I just back up specific things I need with my scripts.
For my Ubuntu desktop, I use the builtin backup tool to take backups on my NAS. For my homelab, I have everything running on Proxmox and my Proxmox backup server takes care of the homelab backups.
I'm currently using TimeShift to backup my desktop onto an external hard drive (the why is because of how simple it is to use) and I'll be making a copy of anything I upload to my jellyfin server onto the external hard drive as well. I hope to eventually have a dedicated backup server and have a duplicate of it at a friend's house for offside backup too
Just a reminder. Consider and test your restore process as well. Backups without restore testing are kind of questionable. Also think how the restore will go. Do you want to do a bare metal restore, or will you just reinstall, and restore certain things for example. Lot of these backup methods will not get a true bare metal restore set, nor can file system backups be "perfect" if they are done on a running system. Databases and things like cryptfs mounts for example can be problematic for example. Nor do all tools necessarily backup the full structure of the file system.
Not saying these are always issues, just be aware of them.
I just use a script on an systemd timer. Well two scripts on two timers really - one running daily, one weekly for different data. It's just a bunch of rsync commands copying folders to an hdd in my system and I reroute the output into a simple log file, mainly to verify if it ran at all. I am a bit paranoid about that. I can also run it manually whenever I want.
Oh and some of the data I also rsync again to a smb cloud drive from Hetzner.
I do not keep multiple versions and I delete remote files that have been deleted locally. It's just a 1:1 copy.
Oh and I use OpenSuse Tumbleweed so I have auto configured btrfs snapshots. Though I have not needed them yet and could not even say how I can use those. I figure that out once I need them.
I only have backups of my important files, encrypted and synced through rclone.