Tarsnap pricing is for deduplicated data. You need to divide it by orders of magnitude for a proper comparison.
Apples and oranges - what you are doing is on site backup, Tarsnap is offsite. Both are needed.
Apples and oranges - what you are doing is on site backup, Tarsnap is offsite. Both are needed.
To be fair, that depends on how much duplicate data you're backing up. If you weren't using Tarsnap, you probably wouldn't have very many mostly-duplicate archives.
I think the better way to look at it is that Tarsnap makes it easy to have many archived snapshots of your data without paying very much more. Whether being able to have daily snapshots for the past year is worth more than always having just your latest archive... well, that depends on what you're doing. It's a feature I think is important for my own use cases, but I'm not so bold as to think that everybody has exactly the same needs as me.
Every 24 hours, I dump a database and let tarsnap work out what to actually send to S3. And it does such a good job, for such a low price, that it boggles the mind.
With Mixpanel I'd expect even better results since their data is append-only by nature. I.e. think about deduplication when backing up a large append-only log file on a daily basis.
Tarsnap has weaknesses but cost of storage for Mixpanel type of workload is not one of them.