3

First of all, I'm aware of threads like Comparison of backup tools.

With that in mind, I have a specific set of requirements for backup, and I was wondering which are the current options - the informations around are fragmented and confusing, especially considering that online drives are not backup solutions.

My requirements are the following:

  • be able to backup individual files (ie. no dejadup, thanks)
  • cloud storage (upload of an intermediate backup archive is not viable)
  • have a daemon running in the background, backing up at least at time intervals (optionally, having a continuous backup)
  • no need to setup a server
  • file versioning
  • ability to handle large data sets (number of files rather than space)
  • ability to backup drives that are not guaranteed to be mounted, without hassles

Optionally:

  • restore from the backup structure of a given point in time. this is different from restoring from the current backup tree, with the option of choosing older versions.
  • reporting

Price doesn't matter.

Excluded solutions:

  • JungleDisk was perfect, until the moment it's been discontinued.
  • SpiderOak is really badly coded; It has annoying bugs, and it hangs on large number of files. Also, if a drive is not mounted when SO starts, it won't be backed up.
  • Symform has a bug in the registration. Since you can't contact support without registering, it's completely useless.
Community
  • 1
Marcus
  • 2,475

1 Answers1

1

I don't know about minimal setup, but otherwise CrashPlan should meet your requirements. Actually CrashPlans setup is anything but minimal. :(

Konstantin Schubert
  • 332
  • until now, Crashplan looks a viable choice. I've corrected the question as you pointed with a more appropriate wording (I didn't want to setup a server, essentially). – Marcus Jan 02 '13 at 18:06
  • Note that Crashplan is also poorly coded, and will fill your root directory with backup files if you ever have a destination drive unmounted when it wants to write, or if you use an encrypted /home (it runs before you login and can mount /home). Avoid. – Tom Brossman Jan 02 '13 at 21:19
  • @TomBrossman Does this hold even if home has been encrypted as part of the Ubuntu-installation? – Konstantin Schubert Jan 03 '13 at 09:13
  • @Konstantin Correct. If you have an encrypted /home directory, you can't use Crashplan. You might try to fix the bug yourself, or come up with a workaround. It's a commercial product and other superior products exist so I went elsewhere. – Tom Brossman Jan 03 '13 at 10:03
  • @TomBrossman can you elaborate on the superior products? That's what I'm actually looking for. – Marcus Jan 03 '13 at 11:29
  • @Konstantin you can install CrashPlan for your user only. This way, it will start after you login, so that it will be able to handle an encrypted home. – Marcus Jan 03 '13 at 11:31
  • @Marcus Thank you, that's how I was using it and I was surprised because I had never encountered that problem. So, the takeaway is: If you install it for each user seperately, it will be launched after login and work fine? – Konstantin Schubert Jan 03 '13 at 11:36