What does the 3-2-1 rule look like for you?
-
I didn't consider it as valid, one on (phone and internal nvme1), the second one on nvme2 and the third one in the cloud.
Though I have only two copies of normal data myself, I consider live and cloud to be enough for most data. Everything very important has more backups in other ways (bitwarden has an exportable local version on every logged in device, images are stored in immich on my server making it 3 devices)
-
Atm main sys is a ZFS RAIDZ1 on 3 SSDs
Weekly-ish backup onto 1TB external HDD.
Sync encrypted important stuff to Cloud.
Syncthing some stuff to smartphone. -
borgmatic is way too easy and hetzner storage box is way too cheap to have any excuses
-
3: RAID-1 pair + manual periodic sync to an external HD, roughly monthly. Databases synced to cloud.
2: external HD is unplugged when not syncing
1: External HD is a rotating pair, swapped in a bank box, roughly quarterly. Bank box costs $45/year.
If the RAID crashes, I lose at most a month. If the house burns down, I lose at most 3 months. Ransomware, unless it's really stealthy, I lose 3 months. If I had ongoing development projects, a month (or 3) would be a lot to lose, and I'd probably switch to weekly syncs and monthly swaps, but for what I actually do - media files, financial and smart-home data, 3 months would not be impossible to recreate.
All of this works because my system is small enough to fit on one HDD. A 3-2-1 system for tens of TB starts to look a lot like an enterprise system.
-
Hm I wonder why snapshots wouldn't satisfy 3. Copies on the same disk like /file, /backup1/file, /backup2/file should satisfy 3. Why wouldn't snapshots be equivalent if 3 doesn't guard against filesystem or hardware failure? Just thinking and curious to see opinion.
-
2x 2TB with rsync
2X 500GB with rsync.
1x 1TB cloud drive via rsync
The 2TB has a 500GB dir that gets cloned to the other 2 500GB drives and the cloud.
4 drives, 2 locations (1 offsite)
I could spare 500gb portion somewhere I guess but it's just easy atm that the important 500GB gets copied around 1x a week.
-
If I'm reading your example right, I don't think that would satisfy three either. Three copies of the data on the same filesystem or even the same system doesn't satisfy the "three backups" rule. Because the only thing you're really protecting against is maybe user error. I.e. accidental deletion or modification. You're not protecting against filesystem corruption or system failure.
For a (little bit hyperbolic) example, if you put the system that has your live data on it through a wood chipper, could you use one of the other copies to recover your critical data? If yes, it counts. If no, it doesn't.
Snapshots have the same issue, because at the root a snapshot is just an additional copy of the data. There's additional automation, deduplication, and other features baked into the snapshot process but it's basically just a fancy copy function.
-
Toss in another drive for RAID5. That way you can at least have some redundancy...
-
Currently only have pictures and documents stored, so everything easily fits on 1tb. One copy on my homeserver (unencrypted), one copy on my laptop (Luks encrypted), and one copy with rsync and a raspi at my parents (unencrypted). Might change encryption strategies to all luks.
-
It's not important data. Why would I spend another $200+ for another 20TB drive to have redundancy for 1 and 0 I don't care about...
-
Fair point.
-
My current plan once new migration is completed:
Primary pool - 1x ZFS (couldn't afford redundancy but no different to my RPI server). My goal is to get a few more drives and set up a RAIDZ1/2.
Weekly backup of critical data (eg. nextcloud) from primary pool to a secondary pool. Goal here is to get a mirror but will only be one drive for now.
Weekly upload of secondary pool to hetzner storage box via rsync.
Current server
1x backup to secondary drive (rpi)
1x backup to hetzner storage box via rsync -
A usb stick and an old hard drive from 2009. The crackhead way of dealing with backups.
-
"3! 2! 1!" Is just what I say when doing some potentially deleterious action after rsyncing a few key directories to a separate volume
