I have about 8TB of storage that is currently only replicated through a raid array. I occasionally sync that to another USB drive and leave that in a fireproof safe (same location).
I’d really like to do an offsite backup, but I only have 10Mbps upload. We are literally talking months to do a full backup.
How do others handle situations like this?
Reconsider how much of that 8tb really needs to be backed up. Thousands of pictures of your cat aren’t really going to be missed, and your Linux ISOs can be redownloaded.
Backblaze and AWS can send you a NAS device you can put on your lan. You can copy your data into the device, then send them back and have them load those data into your account.
Pre-seed your backup location and then hope that your change rate is small enough to fit into 10 mb. For example, if you’re using AWS you can get a snowball to load data into S3.
Idk what’s offsite to you but if it’s a controlled place for you (like from a friend or family member) you could simply bring your device one day and do the first copy there.
Otherwise maybe rsync a folder at a time.
Just start the backup and wait 3 months. That’s not that bad. Are you losing access to the data soon? If not, just let your auto sync take care of it piece by piece.
I had an emergency situation where I needed to move the data and upload was 25mbps. Stupid cable companies not understanding why people need symmetry. It would take approximately a year of continuous upload and I didn’t have that. So I use 4 Starlinks, aggregated them to the cloud server with a VPN and now I had 225Mbps to 425Mbps upload. It took about 3 weeks but all the data was moved.
I’ve never really understood why, seemingly universally, symmetric (or at least non-anemic upload plans) are completely unaffordable compared to “normal” plans (assuming they’re available at all).
It truly sucks for stuff like this.
Seemingly. 🙂
My ISP only has symmetric. The cheapest one they advertise costs about 10 Big Macs per month.
I can’t speed test my connection as my wifi is the bottleneck. But the way our law is, they can’t really lie about speed. The “up to” trick was banned a long time ago.
Not just unaffordable, just not available.
That house where I needed to transfer data was in a neighbourhood only had copper phone lines from the 1960’s for DSL and then coax cable. The maximum possible was 400Mbps down and 25Mbps up. Over the years it was increased to 800Mbps down, still 25Mbps down. I paid over $1000 USD a month for that shit internet. Because the only alternative was 4Mbps to 8Mbps upload.
This is a major metro area, 700k people. Starlink was a game changer. Not symmetric, but waaaay better.
There’s only so much bandwidth on the cable line and they’ve spent ages marketing download speeds as the measure. If they go from 400/25 to 400/50, 99.9999% of people wouldn’t understand and wouldn’t pay extra. But make it 425/25 and people will buy. Bigger number more better.
