[Borgbackup] What don't you like about Borg?

[Antoine Beaupré]

On 2016-10-20 11:51:59, Marian Beermann wrote:
>> And it's obvious to me there is a lot of "intelligence" on the
>> server-side, in fact, SSH is not merely a transport as much as a RPC
>> conduit to allow borg to call itself on the remote end.
>
> I'm not sure if I ever wrote it on GitHub; personally I think the
> Repository API is a relatively good API to implement other backends,
> when an "named object API" is added, which would be used for special
> cases like repokey and manifest storage, since these would usually
> require special handling by backends.

Yeah, I was wondering if there was a way to separate the storage API
instead of the RemoteRepository API... but I am not sure it would work.

> Then something like pluggy could be used to provide a simple
> plug-and-play mechanism for repository backends with named (versioned) APIs.
>
> These should still be very stable.

I am not sure I would bother with a third party plugin module... Just
class derivation and module discovery should be sufficient.

>> See also:
>> 
>> https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/1070
>> 
>> This is also a frustrating blocker for me: there are very cheap backups
>> providers out there that could be leveraged to provide virtually
>> unlimited, secure backups to borg. Backblaze, for example, has
>> ridiculous prices (50$/machine/year for unlimited backups, business
>> use). In comparison, rsync.net, which supports borg, is 2.40$/GB/year,
>> so you would get a measly 20GB a year with 50$...
>
> rsync.net price is 0.36 $/GB/year:
> http://www.rsync.net/products/attic.html
>
> It's still not the cheapest option, but personally I'm satisfied with
> their service.

That's pretty cool, I didn't know that! I was just looking at:

http://rsync.net/pricing.html

> TN: I'm not paid / I don't receive any benefits for talking about rsync.net

Similarly for other providers for me.

A.

-- 
Premature optimization is the root of all evil
                        - Donald Knuth