My favorite frontend for this is Pika backup.
Thanks for your recommendation. I’m giving Pika a whirl and I’m liking it so far. I have been using Timeshift for years but it’s has some issues that I’m hoping borg/pika will address.
What are the advantages of using Borg instead of Duplicity?
tl;dr Duplicity does full or incremental backups, BorgBackup only does full backups but with deduplication.
After the first backup with Duplicity, you can choose to do an incremental backup which will only store the data that has changed since the last backup. This saves time and disk space but you have to do slow full backups regularly. See question 3 of the FAQ.
BorgBackup alway does a full backup. But it divides all data into chunks or blocks (don’t know what they call it exactly at the moment). It then hashes those chunks and stores them in a content-addressed storage layer. So it basically works like Git under the hood (plus encryption). If a chunk doesn’t change between backups it‘s already there and does not have to be stored again. A backup is always a full index of the data.
With today‘s fast processors and hashing algorithms, a backup with Borg should be just as fast as an incremental backup with Duplicity. If you ask me deduplicated backups are just plain superior.
Another tool that works like BorgBackup is Restic, which I prefer. Both are good choices that I would trust with my data.
I’ve tried to roll out Borg a few times over the years and always hit a roadblock for one reason or another. Perhaps it was the lack of any front end at all and Borg just chilling in the background, but the documentation was never really clear on what the next steps were.
Just for anyone that wants to try Borg but wants a good ui, borgbase made “vorta” that is a great ui. Plus Borg has 2.0 around the corner.
All the more knowledgeable people here debating different modern backup solutions, and I’m up here using
tarup until yesterday, all happy because borg is a step up from that 😃I’ve been testing out restric and kopia for backups. Anyone with experience with these know the pros and cons vs. Borg?
Someone on github has a decent comparison of a bunch of different backup solutions. Afaik Kopia generally uses more memory but is the faster, and restic is pretty fast and doesn’t use as much RAM as kopia (for awhile people recommended against restic as it lacked compression, but they added it in 0.14 last year).
https://github.com/deajan/backup-bench#in-depth-comparison-of-backup-solutions
I personally prefer kopia (has a gui to help configure it), but restic is also good. I’m not a fan of Borg because you can’t backup directly to object storage (eg. Backblaze B2/Amazon S3/Wasabi/etc), you have to backup to a local or mounted drive, then upload the backup.
I’m also waiting on https://github.com/rustic-rs/rustic to get better windows support, as it should use less memory than restic while being as fast, or maybe even faster.
I’m not a fan of Borg because you can’t backup directly to object storage (eg. Backblaze B2/Amazon S3/Wasabi/etc), you have to backup to a local or mounted drive, then upload the backup.
Which in fact is a good thing, because it’s better to have a local copy and an offsite one. rclone copies it for you without issues.
Note: There are storage hosters that have borg running on their side, like borgbase or Hetzner Storage box.
I had good experience with BorgBackup and restic. However, I’ve settled with restic since it had the right back ends for me that Borg did not have and I rather like it’s just one static binary instead of Python+C.
As far as I can see, BorgBackup has a bus factor of one while restic has two to three active contributers.
Other than that, they are quite comparable, I think.
I was just comparing borg and restic yesterday (still haven’t made up my mind) so your post comes at a great time for me :)
I think in the end I’ll give rustic a chance - it’s supposed to be compatible with restic but written in rust. Much smaller project atm though.
