Project

General

Profile

Enhancement #497

Updated by Marc Dequènes over 7 years ago

Bacula has some drawbacks which do not improve over the last years, mainly: 
 * horrible CLI, difficult to search through backups and volumes 
 * retention is awfully complex to setup 
 * consolidated backups never worked with file volumes 
 * cannot resume, so if a full backup with a lot of data fails midway, useless incomplete volumes pile-up and eat all the available space 

 We may use another system for laptop/user backup, like duplicity for eg. On a trusted centralized backup system for server I would list these criteria: 
 * secure transfer (TLS, SSH…) 
 * delta transfer 
 * compression 
 * resumable 
 * incremental backup: either full-incremental without full backup (except initial setup), or consolidation 
 * open fifo option: useful to backup databases without reserving a huge local space, allows on-the-fly backup stream with unmodified tools (mysqldump, pg_dump…) 
 * proper retention settings: we should be able to express this: keep 1 backup per day during 7 days, then 1 per week during 4 weeks, then 1 per month during 1 year 
 * long time restoration: backup format breaks infrequently and either new software can read old formats or a straightforward command can convert them to the new format 
 * maintained: at least one maintenance release per year, no critical bug without at least a workaround for more than a month 
 * CLI 

 Also, would-be-nice features but we can live without it: 
 * deduplication 
 * single entrypoint when different category of data are to be saved (different retention for eg): single daemon and open port 
 * exclude dir if contains file: allows user to exclude their own dirs, like we did with Bacula, just 'touch .nobackup' and the backup software will skip the dir 

Back