Offsite backup approach?


Since Crashplan is abandoning the home market, I’ve been looking for a good alternative. There’s much I like about Duplicacy.

I’d like to ask your advice about whether the approach I’ve outlined below makes sense, or whether there’s ‘a better way’.

So far, I’ve set up a Windows virtual machine to act as a central ‘backup’ server. Several other VMs on the same host are backing up to it. Other physical machines are backing up to it over the local network.

I’d like to do a couple of things:

a) make a second copy of the ‘storage’ on different hardware/drives. I have a Synology NAS and intend to use Duplicacy’s ‘copy’ command to make a copy of the default ‘storage’ on the VM to the NAS (local folder on the VM -> sftp storage on the NAS). The motivation for this is that the VM has a single physical 8TB drive dedicated to Duplicacy sftp storage, so there’s a single point of failure. Having another copy on the NAS means it’ll be protected from drive failure via RAID-6. Since much of the data being backed up are from other VMs on the same host, it makes more sense to do it that way round, for performance sake (assumed, not tested yet).

b) make an offsite copy somewhere. I’m inclined to use Backblaze (‘personal’ not B2) because it’s an affordable flat-rate and unlimited, like Crashplan. The reason the backup VM is windows is because BackBlaze doesn’t support a Linux client for the ‘Personal’ plan. Hubic could be another offsite option, using Duplicacy with Hubic as secondary storage (using ‘copy’ again), though I’d use a Linux VM in that case.

What do you think? any advice?

  • Paul


I think either one should work. Some may argue that the a is not a real offsite solution if your NAS resides under the same roof as your VM host, but that is something up to you to decide. b may run into some performance issue if you don’t have a high bandwidth uplink. I don’t have any experience with Backblaze personal backup. The performance of their B2 servers is ok if you can use as many threads as you can. However, I wouldn’t recommend Hubic – their servers are so slow that I excluded them from a performance study of cloud storages I did:


Thanks, Gilbert. Should have been more clear, I plan on doing both a) & b), for the reason you gave - doesn’t help if both copies are hit by the same asteroid :slight_smile:

Available internet bandwidth is good - 1Gbps down/40Mbps up. Friends have also recommended Backblaze, so I’m likely to go that way when my Crashplan subscription expires. Their data centers are somewhat local to me too, which helps.

I’d wondered why Hubic was missing from your comparison :).