logoalt Hacker News

bayindirhtoday at 12:20 PM3 repliesview on HN

> Arguably they should even when not in that mode, but it'll churn files repeatedly as you stream files in and out of local storage with the cloud provider.

When you have a couple terabytes of data in that drive, is it acceptable to cycle all that data and use all that bandwidth and wear down your SSD at the same time?

Also, high number of small files is a problem for these services. I have a large font collection in my cloud account and oh boy, if I want to sync that thing, the whole thing proverbially overheats from all the queries it's sending.


Replies

jtbaylytoday at 1:04 PM

Reading your comments, it sounds like you are arguing it is impossible to backup files in Dropbox in any reasonable way, and therefore nobody should backup their cloud files. I know you haven’t technically said that, but that’s what it sounds like.

I assume you don’t think that, so I’m curious, what would you propose positively?

show 1 reply
vladvasiliutoday at 12:50 PM

But if the files are only on the remote storage and not local, chances are they haven't been modified recently, so it shouldn't download them fully, just check the metadata cache for size / modification time and let them be if they didn't change.

So, in practice, you shouldn't have to download the whole remote drive when you do an incremental backup.

show 1 reply
Chaosvextoday at 1:29 PM

Then do it in memory, assuming those services allow you to read the files like that. It sounds like they do based on your other comments.

show 1 reply