Backup Improvements: Restic Backend

[imc67]

@girish I don't use Restic on Cloudron but it seems @necrevistonnezr does according to his post.

I do use it for backing up two Zabbix servers to minio (in Docker on two Synology Nas's) and that works extremely simple and fast.

[necrevistonnezr]

@girish said in Backup Improvements: Restic Backend:

@imc67 does restic backup faster to CIFS with your existing data size?

restic needs less than approx. 30 minutes on average to create the daily incremental backup on OneDrive (remember that I use the builtin file system backup and let restic create backups from the snapshot folder which hold around 250 GB of data, thereof 150 GB Nextcloud)

[imc67]

@girish @necrevistonnezr said in Backup Improvements: Restic Backend:

approx. 30 minutes

that is extremely fast, CIFS + tgz and almost same amount of GB's takes almost 2 hours

[girish]

@imc67 CIFS has to be tested on your specific mount because each CIFS mount is totally different (since it's network based and also depends on remote disk speed etc). But it's good to have a ball park number in any case.

[MooCloud_Matt]

@girish any plan to improve the backup solution on cloudron maybe with Restic as engine?

[girish]

@MooCloud_Matt we are rewriting the storage backend a bit in https://forum.cloudron.io/topic/6768/what-s-coming-in-7-2 . Part of the reason is to make more backends easier to integrate.

[robi]

@girish to give you a few more ideas, this is how FlyWheel implemented their backups add-on with both restic and rclone.

https://github.com/getflywheel/local-addon-backups

I think you'll find it helpful.

[imc67]

Are there any plans to add Restic as an extra backup method? Two of my Cloudrons are in the meanwhile +200GB and the current methods are not sufficient.

[girish]

Not yet but I would like to discuss one thing here. Backups are crucial and loss of data for us implies loss of business and money quite literally. This is why we wrote the backup code ourselves a while ago. Also, why we create our own packages - it's all about data integrity and loss of data === loss of trust in product.

Initially, before we wrote our own backup stuff, I remember we used duplicati and btrfs etc . We faced various issues and there was essentially no help from upstream. Now, restic I am sure is great but if there is some corruption or issue, our customers will look to us to solve this. So, this is a tricky situation for us Maybe we can do some restic integration with lots of warnings? End user also has to know what to do if there is restic corruption and other issues. Keep in mind restic is also not 1.0 yet . They say "Once version 1.0.0 is released, we guarantee backward compatibility of all repositories within one major version; ...".

Any suggestions?

[girish]

this also reminded me of @nebulon 's suggestion of having more provider specific tweaking.

@imc67 are you using hetzner storage box or similar for backups ? what's the plan ? For storage backends that have rsync running, we can do lot better than now.

[imc67]

@girish yes indeed I use Hetzner Storagebox and use tgz over CIFS. Is there a better/smarter/quicker way?

[girish]

@imc67 yes, Hetzner Storagebox has rsync . So, we can be muuuch more efficient when calculating changes. I will investigate how much better it can get.

[imc67]

Curious for which settings do you recommend for backups to Storagebox and how much better it can get

[imc67]

@girish still very curious for the results of your investigation? Everything that's more efficient and quicker than tgz over CIFS more than 200GB to a Storagebox is very very welcome

[girish]

@imc67 still working through the backups rewrite, will leave a note here once I have something.

[imc67]

@girish after 4 months I'm still curious for the results of the "backups rewrite" as our daily backup now takes >5 hours

[girish]

@imc67 the rewrite hasn't happened I think this will only happen over xmas and new year vacation when support is low.

[imc67]

Any update on the backup methodology? I read a lot of issues in the forum about crashing backups due to several reasons. Maybe this can help?

[girish]

@imc67 we have not started working on a restic backend, if that's what you are asking.

I think most of the issues are just because of using a large variety of s3 providers. There's way too many of them. Made worse by people choosing the cheapest/low end providers who don't provide any support either. That and SSHFS/CIFS flakiness. I doubt moving to restic solves any of this because they are not related to backup code itself but infrastructure related. Just my thoughts though.

Now instead of dealing with our backup issues, we would be dealing with issue of another backend like say 1, 2 and 3 - these are just restic issues of last week. It would be worse because we have not much idea on how to deal with restic bugs.

[robi]

@girish It could also be the opposite experience, since restic would be handling all the issues, meaning less work for you with custom one-off fixes as they crop up.