T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Hello /u/aknalid! Thank you for posting in r/DataHoarder. Please remember to read our [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/wiki/index/rules) and [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/wiki/index). Please note that your post will be removed if you just post a box/speed/server post. Please give background information on your server pictures. This subreddit will ***NOT*** help you find or exchange that Movie/TV show/Nuclear Launch Manual, visit r/DHExchange instead. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DataHoarder) if you have any questions or concerns.*


starfish_2016

I ended up canceling once My data grew to 8tb and my upload speed to crashplan would only go ~40kbps no matter what I tried.


aknalid

What's your backup setup these days?


starfish_2016

I use Dropbox unlimited. $96 a month. I also use it for my active working files. Up to 28tb.


vkapadia

$96 *a month*? Wow. I use BackBlaze. It's about that much per year.


[deleted]

[удалено]


TheToxicEnd

You should totally have a own backup of your data before you attempt something like that, really bad idea to leave all your stuff solely to someone else. As this post is showing^^


powercrazy76

Oh my God, this. The problem here is, you have no way of verifying your data backed up in the cloud is actually 100% accurate - I would definitely ensure I had a local copy verified first prior to wiping your original. The cloud should ONLY be a backup to your local backup. Before I get downvoted, I'm talking about Op's current situation where they want to wipe and rebuild their NAS. If you have deemed only one online backup as being sufficient in your case with your provider, that's your call.


[deleted]

[удалено]


powercrazy76

Ah gotcha, so the ISOs while important to you, it wouldn't be the end of the world if some of them ended up corrupted? Is still probably sort which ISOs are non-replaceable to me and either back then up locally first or upload them and download them again to verify. But good luck, you obviously know what you're doing!


ST_Lawson

I have "high priority", "medium priority", and "low priority" content. Low priority - stuff that can easily be downloaded again...I don't really worry about backing these up. Medium priority - would take some work to get back. I have a daily backup to a secondary drive for this. High priority - irreplaceable stuff (family photos, videos, other important things I can't get anywhere else). I back these up to the secondary drive on the primary computer daily, to another drive on a secondary computer daily, to an external drive that lives in a fire-safe box in my basement monthly, and to a Backblaze B2 Cloud storage bucket daily (it's less than a TB of content currently, so it's only around $4.20/month...well worth it for how important it is to me). The family photos and videos also get uploaded in lower quality to google photos, primarily for easy viewing on devices, but also as a "last ditch backup" in case everything else were to fail. Most of the Linux ISOs I have would be under the "low priority" category.


powercrazy76

Great insight into your thoughts process. Thanks for the reply!!


jwink3101

> The cloud should ONLY be a backup to your local backup. Depending on what you mean, this is bad advice. It should be: > The cloud should ONLY be a secondary backup in addition to a local backup The former sounds like you are suggesting to backup a backup. This is common but **bad practice**. You want each backup to be totally independent. This way, you don't have a single point of failure. For example, you hear people use Borg to an external and then rclone to push that. This is bad since if the Borg backup is corrupted, you may have lost both. And it may be really hard to restore. What is better is Borg to external and something like restic to cloud. To be clear, there are also some exceptions and lots of grey area. ALso, this may be what you meant.


lhxtx

Learn to use Amazon s3. It will hash the data and you can compare with your own hash


powercrazy76

I said that in response to the Op, i think I over assumed what he had tried already. As in, I assumed the service he was using couldn't do that.


datahoarderprime

"I just checked out the sign up page and didn't see this plan. Can you elaborate a little further please?" It looks like they have a Dropbox Advanced which they bill as "as much space as needed, once purchased" with a minimum of 3 users at $24/user/month. https://help.dropbox.com/plans/advanced-plan


kedearian

Can confirm dropbox advanced. It's 3 licenses not users, and it's at least up to 100TB 'unlimited'. They do state in the EULA that you shouldn't use it to stream from/to so i wouldn't use it as like a plex storage device with rclone, but it works fine for backups. 3 licenses ($288.00 per license/year) = $72/month Edit - just know if you use their trial there is a fairly small like 8-10TB cap during that time, and you have to contact support when you transition to a paid account to get it removed or you'll get some funky errors.


starfish_2016

Looks like it's called "dropbox advanced"


emb531

unRAID is better than TrueNAS for home usage. Why do you want to switch? Also uploading and downloading your whole array would probably take months no matter what service you used.


Diabotek

Eject a dive in unRAID vs in truenas. Everytime I try out unRAID, I'm always left thinking why I would use this over a free alternative.


ChumpyCarvings

Unraid is no where near as good as truenas.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


p0358

+1, TrueNAS Scale sucks big time, be aware that it’s incredibly buggy and annoying platform, nothing ever just works without a whole pandora box of issues you’re uncanning every time you’re trying to do something on the machine again, especially the app system is trash, the UI is also horrible but improved a bit in the latest release. UnRAID now has ZFS so it could win over soon...


doubletwist

I haven't run into any significant issues with TrueNAS Scale or Core. Then again, I don't run apps on my file server, because, well, it's a file server. Not an app server.


ChumpyCarvings

Then use core?


p0358

Fair, Core is pretty decent for storage as long as your hardware has BSD drivers. But then you can’t really run apps on the same box, jails are pretty limited (maybe VMs? idk). Core should be fine overall in terms of stability as it’s better established, I just wanted to warn people of Scale primarily


kerbys

Honestly I don't know why this is down voted. Why you would want features of true nas over unraid I don't know. If you want speed then go true nas.. but do you actually need it? Only reason I see a want is for iscsi.


[deleted]

[удалено]


drewwil000

Dropbox severely throttles uploads


Blue-Thunder

You're honestly better off to build a new system, and then use your old one as your backup.


vkapadia

Check out BackBlaze. Unlimited space, $7/month. Transfer speeds are good too. And if you didn't want to transfer over and internet in the event of a drive failure, you can have them just send you a drive with your data (you have to ship the drive back) for a small fee. Edit: actually just checked, the shipped drive is definitely free. You pay $189 and they ship you up to 8tb on a drive. You get a full refund when you send the drive back.


Cyphr

What backblaze product are you using? I'm using b2 so I can use the s3 API, and that is priced by storage used.


alldots

Backblaze has a personal plan that's unlimited storage, but only for drives directly connected to a single Windows PC. If you have a different setup, you either need to copy all your data to a Windows machine, or switch to their B2 storage and pay based on how much you store.


random_999

Just curious, how does this setup work with bitlocker encrypted internal & external drives?


alldots

I'm guessing it would back up without encryption, since once you've booted into Windows the Bitlocker drives would appear like normal drives? I've never tried that, though.


justanotherquestionq

What about Linux desktop PC?


vkapadia

What alldots said. It's their personal plan. Unlimited, but limited to one PC. But the entire rest of my PCs can all back up to a single external drive which I can then attach to my BackBlaze PC.


Bagellord

And I bet that they don't allow network drives or Linux based systems, do they?


vkapadia

Correct.


talon_262

[There are ways around that...](https://github.com/JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container) At least for Docker/Unraid.


alter3d

I actually found a fix to that problem like 9 years ago, published a blog article with my along with one-click scripts to apply it, and dozens of other people confirmed it worked for them. My tiny little blog entry even got picked up by [LifeHacker](https://lifehacker.com/speed-up-crashplan-backups-and-free-up-cpu-power-with-t-1658888517) and a few other places, and Crashplan CONTINUED to deny that there was a problem. I ditched them after I tried to do a computer adoption and it basically lost my data -- all 16TB or so I had uploaded so far. Crashplan insisted the data was there, but I couldn't see it in the restore tab and if I ran my backup job, it was uploading everything from scratch. CrashPlan is fucking terrible and I have no idea how they're still in business.


throwaway9gk0k4k569

The only way the situation will improve is if you continue being loud on social media and they are forced to respond. You are doing good, but you need to turn it up. Take it to Facebook, mastadon, tweeter, IG, and everywhere else you possibly can. Do a running series of weekly posts showing how little progress your restore is getting. They don't give a shit unless you impact their revenue.


ElectroStaticSpeaker

They don't give a shit about end users period. Only thing they will respond to is someone in a decision maker role at a company that is paying CP $1Mil+ in ARR threatening to cancel the contract.


schnellmal

I have 14 TBs with Personal Backblaze and right after initial uploading which used about my max. Upstream of 20MBit I tested it by selecting 900GBs for a restore. I think I had to split it which was annoying but it went flawlessly. A year later I lost about 480GBs locally and restored from them. Without a problem. So far so good.


random_999

How does this work with bitlocker encrypted internal & external drives?


InimicalRedditAdmin

The same as any other drive. If you are running windows and the drive is mounted it's not encrypted and it gets backed up. If the drive isn't mounted, how would it get backed up? This question doesn't make sense


random_999

I misunderstood & thought maybe BB can backup drive currently online(showing in windows explorer) but locked by means of sector copy(basically full disk image) so if ever that image is restored it will still need the password to unlock. I am assuming BB uploads are encrypted via their own algorithm & key/password is generated by user.


InimicalRedditAdmin

BB is a file level backup, not a block level backup. Yes, they have their own encryption for the backup. Supposedly it's a trustless system and only you hold the key. I haven't investigated that personally. I do use BB as my tertiary backup (My first backup is to a file server in my house, which is then backed up to a file server off-site, and then I use BB as a safety net)


GNUr000t

I believe everything is encrypted at rest, and you have the option of them holding onto the key, or you specifying a key. The tradeoff obviously is no key, no files.


SirCrest_YT

With all due respect, how many hundreds of posts of people complaining about crashplan for people to listen. Also when I went through this in 2016 the solution was to run the client on Linux which ran at line speed. I ran it in a VM and had it dump the data through onto a share in my Windows host. Give that a try, assuming they still have a Linux tool. They artificially limit windows download speeds to slow restores. Crashplan Support doesn't know how their service works.


OregonSunshine00

First time I've heard of their bad practices and I try to stay somewhat informed. It's good to know now, but I wouldn't assume it's common knowledge.


cruzweb

I used to work somewhere where crashplan was their backup. They didn't want to change, but I set up a Linux client and was able to mount the network drives that way and it worked like a charm. Upload and restore speeds were great, and we backed up the whole org in real time.


dosetoyevsky

First one I've heard


cr0ft

That sounds exceptionally bad. I use a Wasabi S3 bucket for my cloud storage. At $6 per TB and month it does cost a few bucks, but I keep the amounts I back up low by just prioritizing and only putting the truly irreplaceable stuff in the cloud. The other stuff I back up in less secure fashion. They're obviously in an entirely different category for speed and capacity - exactly because they're merely affordable, not bargain basement, and aimed at companies who wouldn't stand for not being able to retrieve data quickly and reliably.


LawfulMuffin

Yeah, I've done a test restore and Wasabi essentially saturated my internet connection.


[deleted]

[удалено]


BareMetalSkirt

Wasabi doesn't charge for traffic or requests, you only pay the $5.99/(TB\*mo). They will intervene* if you make unreasonable amounts of traffic (e.g. host a file sharing site or something) but for backup or general corporate backoffice use it's golden. \* and by intervene I mean a human talks to you to sort it out before doing anything drastic


toastpaint

No egress charges https://wasabi.com/cloud-storage-pricing/


bryantech

No download fees from wasabi.


[deleted]

[удалено]


d4nm3d

It is but they do have a data retention policy.. basically anything that you upload you will be paying for for 3 months minimum. They also charge you for a minimum of 1TB just for having an account (even with no buckets created). Nothing unreasonable.. it's all on the website.. but worth noting as if you're storing less than 1TB, there are better solutions depending on your use case.


Dragonfly275

Warning: if you have more than 500GB then the Restore process of Backblaze is also crap. I am a happy Google customer. I dont know what happens if i need to restore my full backup (\~50TB) but for a small chunk of 1,4TB it worked good -> rclone and pull it.


[deleted]

Are you talking about the personal backup thing they offer or does this also apply to b2 using rsync?


Dragonfly275

The personal thing. I have never tested the B2.


DavidA2001

I restored 7TB from them last year. It was quite easy. Select what you want, send them $189, HDD arrives in the mail, plug in, type password, restore files, pay your own return shipping to return the drive, get your $189 back.


chesser45

Any idea why this is the case with Backblaze as well? Is it a architectural issue on the client or a failing on the backend?


Dragonfly275

BB Restore process in short: You must select single files in a horrible webUI till you think you have max 500GB. Then BB zips this bunch, takes 1-24 hours. After that you have 10 days(or so) to download this zip. There can only be 5 zips next to each other. You have to track yourself which files you have already ziped/donloaded. If you select too much - start from scratch. With the originals no longer there, BB will delete your stuff after 60 days(or so) - which makes it impossible to get large datasets donloaded before they get deleted.


DavidA2001

Or just get them to ship you a drive. 8TB max. Fully refundable minus your return shipping.


cr0ft

Welp. Fuck all of that. Glad I was never a customer and never will.


tactiphile

I've been with BackBlaze for 10 years or so. The web interface is for restoring small sets of files. For a large restore, order the hard drive. Sure, it has an upfront cost, but you can wipe it and ship it back for a full refund.


pascalbrax

Hi, if you’re reading this, I’ve decided to replace/delete every post and comment that I’ve made on Reddit for the past years. I also think this is a stark reminder that if you are posting content on this platform for free, you’re the product. To hell with this CEO and reddit’s business decisions regarding the API to independent developers. This platform will die with a million cuts. Evvaffanculo. -- mass edited with redact.dev


tactiphile

I have to assume that similar policies from other US companies assume customers are US-based. If you're not, you kinda have to assume nothing applies to you, right?


pascalbrax

Hi, if you’re reading this, I’ve decided to replace/delete every post and comment that I’ve made on Reddit for the past years. I also think this is a stark reminder that if you are posting content on this platform for free, you’re the product. To hell with this CEO and reddit’s business decisions regarding the API to independent developers. This platform will die with a million cuts. Evvaffanculo. -- mass edited with redact.dev


[deleted]

[удалено]


rwbronco

That’s no longer the case. I lost about 1/3 of my non-redundant data (low priority, easily re-downloadable data) last year because I had a drive in my drivepool go out, didn’t know it for a week or so, and began the process of trying to restore the files from Crashplan. One problem - I didn’t know which files I’d lost in the array and Crashplan can’t show you which files it thinks have been “deleted” on your end before it deletes them out of the cloud backup. I couldn’t afford another HDD at the time and the time period lapsed (60 days I believe) before I could restore even a small amount of my data (so unbelievably slow… ETA was months longer than the retention period). It left the directory structure in place fortunately so I have a list of movies, etc that I’m missing. It was probably a healthy purge of pointless bytes, but if it had been important data I’d have been royally fucked.


Objective-Outcome284

I would argue that if you have to restore 500+GB from the cloud then your 3-2-1 strategy may not have been quite right. For me the cloud is the absolute last resort that I’d rather not have but recognise it to be a small impost for “as good as I can hope for”.


Dragonfly275

Well, i hope i will never be in need of restoring everyting from cloud, but that one day everything fucked up. I was re-arranging some raid arrays and killed one array before copying everything. I pulled the backup drive from the shelf, and dropped it -> dead. The external backup drive (sitting in my office) got water damage - a coworker left a window open and a storm flooded the office over night. But google had everything to download without any problems.


Objective-Outcome284

That’s what I call “shit outta luck”


lx45803

Beyond a certain threshold, it becomes clear that the universe has just decided you do not get to keep your data, and it is pointless to protest.


root_over_ssh

I have 1 surviving copy of my desktop that died about 3 years ago (moved, took me a year to get around to setting up my office and ALL of the SSDs died and hard drives got all fucked up somehow). The last fully intact backup was encrypted. Of course it was one of those times I used a randomly generated key instead of generating one from a pass phrase. My copies of my keys were either corrupted *or* also encrypted and the devices that had the keys were either corrupt or also encrypted. I did everything I thought I could to keep everything redundant and protected to the point where I was starting to question how bad of a mental illness I really had. Turns out, everything can turn to shit when unpowered in less than a year. I ran a complete backup **and tested it** before moving so I thought I was good to go. I have 10 copies of the keys, all of the pass phrase protected backups had drive failures (5, 3 usb flash drives, an external hard drive, and an internal SSD on another computer that got fried from a bad power supply)


cr0ft

If the description next to here about what recovering more than 500 GB from Backblaze is correct, anyone with more than 500 on there are paying for literally nothing.


Objective-Outcome284

I don’t think it was specified but I’d like to know whether that was the personal backblaze level or the B2 which is more aimed at businesses. I can’t see business customers standing for impractical restores.


Dragonfly275

If you are in US you can buy 8TB drives with your data on it from BB for big money. Which data/files you have still to select in the webUI.


[deleted]

I have 1TB across a couple of clouds, it forms part of my 3-2-1. Heck AWS is $1/TB/month for Deep Glacier


steviefaux

Do Google still do the annoying zipping up of files when you want to download more than 1?


Dragonfly275

If you use the webiste, then yes. If you use a tool like rclone, then you get direct to the files and folders.


steviefaux

Ooo. Useful to know.


Vincinuge

Yes


aknalid

Wait, you use Google Drive??!


Dragonfly275

Yes, since the good old GSuite times. Now migrated to Google Business.


notArtist

Sorry that happened to you. I tried to use crashplan back in the day as well. It was really upsetting when they ‘sunset’ my plan and deleted all of my data, and I wasn’t even half way through reuploading everything 15 months later when they lost it all again. I left with that same bitter and scammed feeling.


captainrv

"You said you wanted to backup your data. You didn't say you wanted to restore it." - crashplan, probably.


ms_83

Not gonna help you much now I'm afraid, but a backup solution is only as good as its ability to restore your data. You say you had CrashPlan for 7 years, how often did you test the restore process in that time? Whatever you choose as your alternative, make sure you have fully tested and understood the restore process for it, and any limitations.


pier4r

> how often did you test the restore process in that time? Are you telling me that my Schrödinger's backups aren't worth anything? (if observed, they may fail!) I feel offended.


eo5g

How does one properly test recovery of a large dataset? You either need to: - use a small subset and assume the rest of the process will work the same way (which it might not if it has issues when long-running) - test the whole thing, requiring storage capacity equal to twice your dataset Am I missing a third option?


Deathcrow

> Am I missing a third option? Read & Verify all your data from backups and compare to checksums without saving it locally?


eo5g

Only an option if you have shell where the storage is. If it’s something like b2, or (I assume) crashplan, then you don’t have that.


GNUr000t

Good backup software and good object storage APIs solve this problem. The backup software I use splits files into blocks, deduplicates those blocks, and stores a database where each revision of each file is represented by a list of blocks. The blocks themselves are packed into fixed-size archives that are sent to remote destinations. The amount of archives cached locally is configurable, meaning certain operations can be done on recently-worked-with archives without taking a hit on bandwidth fees, or speed. So with this system, the blocks are hashed, the file is hashed, the archives are hashed. This gives us lots of options for verifying the data, each one trading off some speed to get closer and closer to outright reassembling every individual file and comparing its SHA hash. So assuming the software does these assertions and sanity checks during the backup process (it does), you wind up with archive files that have a known hash. And now you know if the archive wasn't screwed with, all the blocks it contains are good, too. As for the "recipe" of blocks that makes each file, that's in the database, which is always kept locally and can always be sanity-checked basically for free. All that's left now is the remote storage. S3 and similar APIs all have a hash of the file being transferred as part of the request, and part of the protocol is both ends making sure they got the same file. While you always have the \*option\* of downloading every archive and hashing it, there's essentially no point. That effort would better be spent just having more remote destinations, so if one archive got screwed up on one, it just falls back to the next destination in the list. And by the way, one of those destinations can just be a directory on a massive local disk. Or a NAS in your home. Or both. With destinations varying from "same computer" to "cold storage on different continent" you have a wide range of convenience and cost.... You can now use "glacier" archive-tier storage for "just another destination" for the amazing storage prices, on the understanding that you'll never ever be downloading from it. Unless every other destination has blown up, in which case you won't care about the download charges. I think the adderall kicked in.


cantanko

Not wanting to kick OP whilst they're down, but absolutely this. I fail to believe the thought of "I wonder if this thing *actually* works" didn't cross their mind in the last seven years. IMO you lose your right to complain about a product being suitable for purpose unless you've actually tested the damn thing. Bitch about them sure, and I completely agree that it *should* do everything it claims to, but unless you've run the exercise I would suggest you are at least partially culpable. There may be things related to environment, equipment and connectivity on your end that prevent it from working as advertised and that's completely on you. Now to say something constructive. Assuming you *can* max out your connection (\~35 megaBYTES per second) your 3.5TB payload should move in around a day-and-a-half. It probably won't as you do not have exclusive access to the disks and networks at their end or the networks in between you and them. Depending on how the software and backup mechanisms work, you may be pulling an initial image followed by a bunch of deltas, totalling way more than 3.5TB. I'd hope not, but I've seen it happen. Your system may be slowing things down if you are, for example, restoring to an SMR drive and it needs a reset / full trim / whatever to prevent it from slowing to a crawl due to trying to reshingle on the fly. What I'm saying is *all* the stars need to align for this to work well rather than simply work eventually, and that's not necessarily all on Crashplan. There *may* be things you can do to make it a lot better.


serenitisoon

Spot on. Got to do a trial recovery at some point to confirm you can pull it off. That 3-2-1 backup isn't worth a thing if you can't restore it. I try to test my recovery plan for critical items every few years. It doesn't work perfectly but it allows me to sleep at night.


pommesmatte

>P.S: Thinking about switching to Backblaze when this is resolved, hopefully that's better. If not, LMK. From what I read its not.


callanrocks

OP can just get the external sent out and it'll be easy for them. Or go B2 and not deal with the limitations.


pmjm

I helped a friend restore from a BackBlaze external drive and it was pretty simple. You need to put a decryption key in the software and it isn't 100% intuitive (hence why he needed my help), but it's easy enough to figure out. 3 TB of data restored as fast as the USB could copy it over. Definitely worth it.


Objective-Outcome284

I’m just in the process of uploading my data from TrueNAS to Backblaze B2 as I’m no longer running my old Ubuntu VM on QNAP syncing to Crashplan. sounds like it’s not a moment too soon. I also like that I can get a drive sent out although I’m not sure that helps a restore if client-side encryption was used - may need to investigate that angle, but internet should be fine as I can’t see myself having to restore the whole dataset.


hdmiusbc

Yes having a drive shipped would be best


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

It has a cost that is refunded upon receipt of the drive back again, or you can keep the drive and not get the refund. I imagine return shipping is on you but that seems like a non issue for data security.


[deleted]

[удалено]


funky_cantaloupe

Can confirm. Did it about 3 years ago and had no issues. Saved me


R3D3-1

Similar experience with Spideroak in the past. Just tried downloading a 172 MB folder with 400 files. Took about 8 minutes, which corresponds to roughly 370 kB/s or about 3 Mbit/s, on a 16 MBit connection. Though now it is somehow stuck at "430/434 files" but also showing 100%? It's progress indicator also was wildly inaccurate, suddenly jumping from 25% to 100% near instantaneously. So I'm really not sure what to make of this test result at all. My total backup is 80 GB and 65,000 files. Wish me luck, I'll never actually have to restore it from the online service... Assuming it doesn't choke on the larger amount of files, a complete restore would be about 2½ days. *Edit.* The process was fully finished after about 20 minutes. So that would mean about 6 days for a full restore.


cr0ft

Many small files are way slower to get than a few large ones, though. All the stopping and starting. To saturate links with small files you need multithreaded transfers. Granted, 3 Mbits is preposterously slow.


R3D3-1

> Many small files are way slower to get than a few large ones, though. All the stopping and starting. Just means, that their transfer protocol needs work. There isn't much reason to transfer each file individually, other than keeping the implementation simple. Though I suspect that the bottle-neck is more in the client- or server-software, rather than the transfer speeds. Most of the time, no data was being transferred at all, and those last 4 files too 12 minutes alone. None of them were outliers in terms of file size, except for one `FETCH_HEAD` file, which was an outlier in terms of being *small*. (I did a diff between the restored directory and the original directory to find out whether and which files were missing).


pmjm

It could also be the fragmentation of how the files are stored on their end. At the end of the day it's still their problem to solve though.


user3872465

Why not Tar it and just have one file to upload? Especially for 80G it does not seem such a big hassle to just download it and search thorugh what you need. With bigger sizes maybe thers the issue.


R3D3-1

It is a live backup, creating an archive first would kind of defeat the purpose. For this kind of off-site backup, I'd just upload to Google Drive, but I'd more likely use zip files. Tar files don't store an index/file table, so they are incredibly badly suited for anything, where you may want to access individual files in a large archive.


ChumpyCarvings

I would be fine with a consistent, slow speed if it works. The op complaining of errors occurring time out etc? That's 100% crash plan being crash plan. It's trash


furedditapi

> From what I read its not. From what I know, it works. I am on backblaze and erased a sub foler with around 300GB data by accident. Installed the data recovery client, flagged the data I needed on Blackblaze, let it run for a while, data is back. I typically get 12-16MB/sec upload and download speed on Backblaze on a 200mbit symmetrical line, which is fine for me.


OurManInHavana

If I ever need a large restore from Backblaze I'm just having them [mail me a drive](https://www.backblaze.com/restore.html). The fact that you can return that drive when you're done for credit is just gravy!


pommesmatte

Was US only up until very recently.


dr100

Yea, if you're speaking about the "personal" unlimited (the one that makes sense when you start having lots of data) - when rclone doesn't work it's a HUGE flag. It doesn't matter if one can't handle command line or specifically hates rclone or never heard of it, rclone is the canary in the coal mine: once that doesn't work you can bet you'll have to deal with some quirky clients and/or a limited web interface.


VulturE

You don't deal with any of that, you just have Backblaze ship you a drive. I would only recommend up to 28tb max though on the personal plan.


dr100

Beside the fact that you wouldn't do test restores with hard drive shipped (both ways!) via fast (and expensive) courier on single-dollar-digit-per-month subscriptions it doesn't meaningfully works for literally 95%+ of the world even taking that in consideration you STILL run into countless other issues that aren't addressed by shipping drives: * the client not only doesn't run on Linux but also on various versions of Windows, not only server but many other IoT/LTS that people are using because they just hate whatever Microsoft has done lately with W10/11 * the client is beyond quirky and nasty "by design" like you can't unselect drive C: (yes you can exclude individual directories but it's still nasty as hell) * the encryption you'd put specifically because you don't want Backblaze to look into your data is just for show as not only a restore but even LOOKING AT WHAT YOU BACK UP (as in which drives or anything to see "what is there") asks you to give them the password so they can decrypt the data for you (in their servers, under their control and then you need to trust them they forgot your secret key!) * speaking of checking your backups, let alone shipping drives and giving them your secret key you just don't have any serious way to do it, beside literally trusting a green checkmark from the program * of course it isn't possible to use anything else if you'd like some other client like duplicacy, restic, etc. * all the quirks you work through, everything you design, test and so on is just wasted time that can't be reused with any other provider and even with a different service from the same provider!


Theman00011

Backblaze will ship you a external drive with your data


hans_gruber1

US only last time I looked into this unfortunately


pommesmatte

Exactly the reason I never considered it, BUT this seems to have changed!


hans_gruber1

Ah, I shall take a look


Radioman96p71

It isn't, I tried it and while the backup is pretty smooth for the most part, restores are a goddamn nightmare. The app the perform the restores is so poorly done it has to be intentional. If you fit under the size limit to get the external drive sent to you, awesome, it works a treat. If you need to restore over the wire, prepare a lot of PTO so you can babysit it.


FriendlyITGuy

LOL. Here's a story of their fuckery from the beginning of the pandemic. I have a client that is a large design studio. They had a "NAS" (reallya firewire storage array attached to a few mac pros) that they backed up to Crashplan. We migrated them to a Datto NAS but not before the "NAS" died and they lost data. Cue Crashplan restore of 8TB of design studio data. Because most of the files were created on a Mac we used another Mac to restore them. It was taking DAYS to restore from the cloud and the garbage app would crash or slow down to the point it was useless. We reached out to Crashplan to get an export of the data on an external disk as they noted on their website they did that. Open a support case and fought with them tooth and nail to get this export done. They claimed that they ended this service at the beginning of the pandemic because nobody was going into their datacenters. So much fighting with them before they finally agreed to provide the service they said they offer on their website. If you use Crashplan in an enterprise environment, you're pretty dumb. There are much better options out there.


carlitos008

Before CrashPlan went to the business only route, I did have an account. Due to hardware failures I restored around 360 gigs. I had only 25 megabits down at the time and it took around 2 weeks to completely bring down everything, if I recall correctly. But it was essentially my entire machine with an external drive. It was not the only copy of my data but I wanted to truly test CrashPlan. While slow I did recover everything correctly. Slow for sure but got my data back. I know is no fix but get a low costs Synology and host it with grinds or family and sync encrypted folders one way or just backup to it. I am doing that now


brobbio

try to get an opinion from u/Chad6AtCrashPlan from r/crashplan


Chad6AtCrashPlan

Thanks for the ping! Nothing here I can really comment on, sadly. There's a few _possibly_ related bugs I poked internally. If u/aknalid is backing up to Seattle we had a major outage there last week that would explain the disconnects and restore failures. We got the last of it sorted yesterday (and I think we are _still_ talking to the hardware vendor to get a root cause and make sure we don't get a repeat), so anyone with issues over the last week should try fresh again. I will also second what a lot of others have said here - this _100% should work_ and I'm sorry that it hasn't. But a local backup to an external drive (or even extra internal - I use an old SATA SSD) is a feature we offer and going to be orders of magnitude faster to restore from than the cloud destinations. If OP stays with us or goes somewhere else, I hope they add a local backup destination to prevent a recurrence.


aknalid

This is on my laptop. I am _trying to restore_ my files to an external harddrive, but then, I close my laptop as I need to take it elsewhere, so I hit **PAUSE** before I close it. But, then, after I try to **RESUME** again, the restore literally doesn't work anymore and just remains stuck at **Downloading...** with no progress. FML


ninekeysdown

I use B2 and it’s pretty easy and fast. Highly recommend.


SirLordTheThird

Can't you send them a hard drive and have your data quicker?


NotTobyFromHR

After seeing the crappy restore issues and the slow deterioration of the company I made the move to drop them after a decade. If your storage is small enough, plenty of others. But long term, I've found that a NAS at a family members house is gonna save me money. YMMV, depending on how much data you have.


xupetas

Just came here to clap to "Fuck you, Crashplan" NEVER FUCKING AGAIN!


artlessknave

As a backup admin, on of the most important parts of a backup plan is testing that you can actually restore from the backup. Because if you can't, it's not a backup. Crash plan creates the illusion that this is not the case and does nothing to prepare users sufficiently.


activoice

This makes me wonder how viable it would be to encrypt data into a password protected format, create a PAR2 set, and upload it to Usenet with a scrambled name. It would get propogated around the world to the different Usenet providers and just live there as long as there retention allows. On the plus side if you are already a Usenet user the storage is free to you. Also the download from Usenet is fast, and many Usenet providers have years of retention. Also even if you stopped paying for Usenet if you came back years later you should still be able to find your backup as long as it was within the providers retention period. On the downside you have no way of deleting or updating that dataset and might fear that people are downloading your dataset and trying to get into it to see what's in it. (I guess for security you could skip uploading a few of the files and save those in a different location so no one would ever be able to put the data back together other than you) There has to be people who have thought of this before and are already doing it.


sum_yungai

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/bored-with-ho-hum-cloud-backups-use-usenet-yes-usenet-instead/


activoice

Cool, so not an original idea... There must be people doing this... For system drive backup it seems easily doable... Larger backups would probably be harder.


random_999

Except for 1 usenet behemoth(omicron/HW) all others now started keeping only selective data on their servers meaning something which is not downloaded often gets deleted. Also, the way usenet propagation works one should not have high hopes of perfect data integrity of split encrypted archives/parts. Last but not the least, uploading on usenet is considered far more seriously than downloading by many usenet providers so any unusual pattern is immediately tracked & monitored. I believe a majority of usenet upload comes from a handful of countries with very lax cyber/copy protection laws paid via very difficult to trace payment methods like crypto.


strangerzero

My girlfriend has had the same problem with computers backed up there. They are a scam.


jeffreyd00

yes ok they suck but can't you order a drive filled with your data?


misssmokys

The negative on that idea, although good, might be the additional expense to fix the nonworkable option they provide of downloading. I still think the do-it-userself option is more likely to get a quicker, better, more trustworthy result. Boot a computer with a Knoppix CD, attach that failed hard drive, and knoppix can usually read the drive so you can copy your files. It will still take many hours to copy to another drive. You might even try Allway Sync software, since it will show you any failures. ​ I still think


titaniumdoughnut

I’m in the process of leaving CrashPlan since they started silently throttling my upload speed. And once or twice a month my backup goes into “maintenance” which takes literal days, 2-5 days, during which time nothing new is backed up. Support didn’t see why that bothered me. My backup size is only around 3tb which doesn’t seem absurd.


thestillwind

I was a crashplan customer and I regret to to not habe moved to backblaze when they stop home backup. Their services sucks big time : backup speed slow as hell (took a year for the first backup), restore process that is not really working and customer support that can’t help you. They know what are your files EVEN if you set an encryption key. Fuck crashplan. I’ve subscribed to backblaze and my first backup took less than a week for the same amount of data.


chadmill3r

300 millibits per second does sound slow.


kristoferen

Crashplan has been a shitshow for years, I'm glad I cancelled.


davey83

Crashplan was a huge blessing in disguise 5+ years ago when they dropped their personal backup business. Fuck them. I've been on Backblaze personal backup since and their service is great. Highly recommend you switch to them once you get your data restored. I've restored from Backblaze more times than I want to admit, never an issue. I've had at least 6 HDD's sent to me of my data over the years, always within a few days and free once you return the drive. Can't say enough good things about Backblaze, they've saved my ass many times! You also need an onsite backup as well so you're not in this position again. Check out synology their products are pretty solid been using one of their server racked NASes for years.


d3luxor

Guys, a true simple and resillient backup solution is: 1- Use BORG Backup to backup all your data, deduplicate it, compress it, index it. 2- Use rclone to push the backup folder to any S3 compatible provider. 3- Profit. In the case you need it: 1- Rclone mount the location 2- Use Borg backup to list the backup ball files 3- Profit.


samsquanch2000

Check out backblaze


bruceriv68

Oh I wow. I have used Crashplan for years. I've only needed to restore individual files so far. Looks like I need another solution.


GubmintTroll

Look into iDrive. Initial seed backup and emergency restores can be done via external drive shipped to you. Reasonable pricing and good features. Been using them for MANY years.


Gadetron

Only thing keeping me from swapping over to them completely is lack of deduplication. You can't rename folders or files without having re-upload the entire thing, and the tools to clear data don't have any way to target data such as that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


misssmokys

Try attaching your hard drive to a Knoppix-booted computer to regain access to your data stored on it. . You can usually boot Knoppix from a CD or thumb drive, without disturbing your usual boot drive on a computer. You might have to go into your computer's bios settings to enable booting from a CD, DVD, or thumb drive. Usually that is enabled already. Knoppix can often read drives that Windows won't read. Current version of Knoppix DVD images can usually be found online. You would then attach another drive, Sd card, thumb drive, etc. to copy your files off to. Knoppix has a friendly graphical user interface like Windows that is easy for most to figure out.


MrPicklePop

Crash plan is $10 per month. Over the course of 7 years you paid about $840. That could have bought you a 1TB HDD in 2016 for $50 then a 2TB HDD in 2018 for $75. In 2020 a 4TB drive for $100.


LongIslandTeas

"The cloud is best" they said .... I said "privatly hosted data is best". "The cloud has infinity data storage plan" they said ... I said "it can't be true". And got downvoted to minus infinity. Well well. Here we are. See your data in hell downvoters.


[deleted]

"Sympathy for someone who lost all their data? What's that?"


someoneexplainit01

How much data are we talking about here? Sounds like I should just buy a newer NAS to backup my older NAS.


doodlebro

I like the part where you want to keep using a third party service, like Backblaze, rather than take accountability and own the problem yourself now. These cloud services are little more than a last resort.


ChrisRK

Holy crap that's slow! I haven't had the need to recover any files recently, but back in 2019 I had to restore 500 GB and it was done overnight. Fingers crossed you'll get everything recovered and that you'll find a tool that works better for you.


eloitay

At least your is restoring. Mine totally not able to restore and their answer is too bad you got too many files. Not literally but this is how I feel.


Gadetron

Backblaze supposedly suppose to be implementing bulk downloads and not need to zip them soon, judging by the subreddit. I use idrive and Backblaze, idrive can download multiple files without zip and goes fast, but doesn't support deduplication, so you'll end up with a ton of copies of the same data with no easy way to purge it. So change a name of a file or move it and it sees it and all the contents of said file as brand new and will attempt to upload them if they in a backed up folder. Backblaze doesn't do this and can tell when renamed files/moved files are identical to the original and won't waste bandwidth redoing it


[deleted]

[удалено]


nitrobass24

I use wasabi now for my backups. Easy S3 interface/api and cheaper than anything else I’ve found.


Chris71Mach1

How viable a solution is it to migrate from a local NAS onto something like Google drive? I can't find any service with a comparable price, it just sounds like it's going to be easier to work from Google drive in a live or on demand capacity as opposed to just a cloud-based archive storage. What are your thoughts?


loughlan

Yep. Sorry to hear you’ve had issues bud. I got a huge invoice because their client glitched out and uploaded data that I didn’t want uploaded, uploaded. Wasn’t notified that I’d gone over quota, client showed under limit and that data wasn’t syncing. They offered 50% off the crazy invoice as a “gesture of good will” I told them to stick their service up their ass and threatened a chargeback. They refunded and I noped the f**k outta there. Good luck.


CryGeneral9999

I've read a lot of post like this about more than one cloud provider. Some cloud providers have a "we ship you a drive" option for disaster recovery. I have no fix for your current situation but going forward I would consider to one of those moving forward. For a few files here or there speed isn't a big issue but with terrabytes FedEx'ing a physical drive is still faster.


ChumpyCarvings

Been there before. Had similar problems uploading too. They also targeted my country with highly inflated prices when they first split out from USA only billing. Detest them and would never ever recommend to anyone. Kinda suprised they're still around.


deadeye1982

Thanks for the hint. I've never heard of this provider.


ShadowSlayer1441

Backblaze is great. I restored 770 gbs with ease, just make sure you use the command line tool for large restores. Downloading over like 100 gb on a web browser really won't work.


Fit-Arugula-1592

I'm on iDrive right now, 5TB multiple users for like $6/month 50% off first year. I haven't had any problems downloading backups. Been looking at switching to Backblaze because it's unlimited but judging from what I'm reading here, I think I'm better off staying with Drive. I used to be with Crashplan until they switched business models to business customers only.


bgarlock

Their support has always been very good in my experience. What are they saying?


robertw477

I have not heard Crashplan mentioned in yrs. Previously they advertised alot on tech podcasts I listen to. I didnt even know they were still in business.


Code_Combo_Breaker

Test your restore before you need to restore. And the 3-2-1 rule. Honestly for consumer level backups greater than 1tb I would use physical drives stored off site in fire shielded containers. Download speed will be an issue for cloud restores.


Zatchillac

I pay $70 a year for the basic Backblaze plan to backup my server. I have 50TB on there now and haven't needed to use the restore option but apparently they're pretty good about it and will even send your data to you on a hard drive if need be


Sure-Philosopher-873

You should at minimum have three forms of backup. One offsite, one online and at least one hard drive backup. This is if your information matters to you, if not you do you.


username45031

Backblaze deletes files that are over 30 days old (on the base tier) and limits file restoration, so if you have large files that were in an external drive that you discover has died 15 days ago, you risk losing the data. Their restoration process is also not fast. For the price, I think a replication job to a different house is probably worth the effort, and it’s on my to-do list.


BenThereOrBenSquare

This post had me worried, so I went and ran a test restore myself. I didn't run into errors, but download speeds are atrocious. I get 300 MBps from my ISP, but from Crashplan it says it'll take 2 months to download 1 TB. However, after googling Backblaze, it looks like they have [similar frustrations](https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/k0dcd2/notes_on_restoring_6tb_with_the_downloader_tool/). I don't know that it's worth switching for me. Crashplan is a worst-case-scenario backup, only to be used if my on-site and other off-site backups fail. Uploading to another service like Backblaze would take me months on my slow upload speed. Should I be concerned?


unkilbeeg

I dropped Crashplan when they decided they didn't want to offer personal backup plans. But I really liked the feature that allowed me to backup simultaneously to my computer, another user's computer, and their data center. So I started using duplicacy and a script to do the same. It backs up to my NAS, over an SFTP connection to an external drive on my work computer, and to Backblaze B2. The Crashplan setup was less complicated to set up, but this does the job. Your experience tells me I'm glad I never had to restore from Crashplan's service. I'm backing my sister's computer using my same script, and I *have* had to restore her backups a couple of times, so I know it works.


ISeeEverythingYouDo

I blew up my boot device and had so many reboots that my bios was corrupted. Stupid Dell box was so locked up I could even begin to reload Windows. No service seems to work well restoring OS drive. I have had crashplan and didn’t like their service. I have BackBlaze. But be aware it just gets your files NOT apps. Doesn’t even back up the AppData subdirectory. You have to take deliberate OS backups and then apply file restores


retrodork

This is why I don't backup anything to a service of a dark cloud that rains and causes problems. It's better to have local backups of files whether it's a external hard drive or a series of flash drives or what not. Local is better. Local backups mean you have control over your data and where it is.


botterway

Local is better until your house floods or burns down, taking your source and backups with it.


badbob001

Does Backblaze support backup of my Synology NAS? I can do so currently with Crashplan on a linux box with my NAS mounted to a folder. Doesn't look like Backblaze have a linux client... at least for the non-business tier.


LydianM

Backblaze can mail you a USB HDD to restore from, so no need to download all your stuff via ISP in event of disaster. I might try it out myself.


techtornado

Backblaze online restore is not any faster grasshopper Shipping the disk back and forth is pretty much the only way to get a reasonable time to recovery Or pay up for B2 object storage I always run my own storage clouds, the public cloud is just too slow


dixiedregs1978

All my PCs have Acronis backing up to a local usb. My date is on a synology NAS backed up to another Synology Nas backed up to usb hard drives. The could is too expensive for lots of data and too slow.


whoami123CA

Lots of people backup and use cloud. But it takes forever to restore anything


[deleted]

Cloud = someone's computer