Hacker News Reader

Comment by ogurechny | Hacker News Reader

Modern backup would simply state “API keys and settings are here:”, and a link to collaboration platform closed after 3 years of existence.

View on HN

Hey, it's the cloud. Backups are "someone else's problem". That is until they are your problem, then you're up a creek.

> Hey, it's the cloud. Backups are "someone else's problem". That is until they are your problem, then you're up a creek.

The FSF used to sell these wonderful stickers that said "There is not cloud. It's just someone else's computer."

The sticker: https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/stickers/thereisnocloud.svg

"Stickers from various FSF campaigns - Print out copies of our stickers for your own uses, local conferences and more." https://www.fsf.org/resources/stickers

Honestly backup space is weirdly sparse for anything on enterprise scale.

For anything more than few machines there is bacula/bareos (that pretends everything is tape with mostly miserable results), backuppc (that pretends tapes are not a thing, with miserable results), and that's about it, everything else seems to be point-to-point backups only with no real central management.

You can add amanda to the "pretends everything is tape with mostly miserable results" list.

Are talking about open source only? Because there are loads of options available. Veritas has two products (netbackup and backupexec). There is also commvault, veeam, ibm spectrum protect and hp data protector. Admittedly only netbackup and commvault are what I would truly call enterprise, but your options are certainly not limited.

As someone who used to administer an ADSM server back a long time ago -- I'm curious what the gap between spectrum protect or whatever it's called now and commvault/netbackup? I've haven't really looked at that space for at least a decade.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com