Encrypted vs unencrypted size

When I encrypt my back up it takes, for example, about 7.5GB to encrypt 4.9GB. Is this expected or am I doing something wrong?

Can you share:

rclone version
rclone command
rclone debug with -vv on it

Size of the file before
rclone lsl on the file after on the remote.

Please follow Ani's instructions. We definitely need a well-documented test of what you are seeing to be able to narrow down what is happening. please note each action you take to reproduce this in as "scientific" a manner as you are able.

It's also probably helpful to know your cloud-provider.

But in general - the answer is no, this should not happen. Encrypted files should not be noticeably larger than unencrypted files. They will not be the exact same size though, but we are taking about very small variations.

Just to give one random example from my testing files:
104 857 600 bytes - unencrypted
104 883 232 bytes - encrypted
So that is 0,024% larger - trivial for pretty much all use-cases.

Additional notes about encrypted files (useful to know but not really relevant to this spesific issue I suspect):

  • Encrypted files compress really badly no matter their contents (so compress before encrypting, not the other way around).
  • Encrypted filenames are moderately longer. On cloud-backends that do not support long names this may be fairly relevant to be aware of.

Animosity022, thestigma,

Let me run some tests myself first again. As I mentioned in another post,
my deduping using hard links might be responsible for the significant overhead. I'll report what I find out. thestigma, my language of choice is
C/C++, I am not sure if I have time at this point to learn go although it looks interesting.

rclone won't preserve hardlinks so that could be the problem

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.