Hello all, I have used and currently used backblaze b2 in a few rclone configurations and find that performance has always been solid - obviously they get you if you have to restore massive amounts.
I was looking at wasabi as an alternative - their big differentiation is no transactions and no egress charges - has anybody had experience with them in terms of performance for multiple uploads and general throttling with rclone.
i use a combo of wasabi for recent backups and aws deep glacier for older backups.
in all my testing and based on forum posts,
nothing comes close to wasabi in terms of the number of api calls per second.
wasabi does not charge for api calls.
i have a folder with over 1,000,000 files in it, and need to sync it daily so not being charged for api charges is a major deal.
and rclone can sync that in approx. 40 seconds, assuming no files need to be uploaded.
that is correct but there are hard limits, and if you hit those limits wasabi can/will cancel your account.
the major downside is that wasabi has a minimum retention period of 90 or 30 days.
so if you upload a 1TB file today, delete it tomorrow, wasabi will charge you for 89 additional days.
note: the default retention policy is 90 days but if you upload veeam backup files, like i do,
you can contact wasabi and they will reduce the retention period to 30 days, for all files, not just veeam files.
very easy to saturate a 1Gbps internet connection.but that can apply to other cloud providers.
one advantage of wasabi, is that it is s3 compatible, up to a point.
so aws and wasabi, both have iam polices, can require MFA tokens before files can be deleted, object locks.
also, client side encryption using sse-c in cases where rclone crypt is not acceptable.
i have python script that makes use of those features.
Fantastic thanks for the info - I am, in fact, currently
Using it for Veeam for office 365 so that’s good to know I’ll reach out.
I’m looking at a much larger Veeam deployment when Veeam 12 is released and backblaze now offers “reserved” pricing where you pay for a year but no egress for the amount you buy (say if you pay for 200 tb you have no transactions and 200 tb egress covered) but costs were very close to wasabi PAYG
I think blackblaze has a much more robust web interface for the buckets (which of course for Veeam you don’t need) maybe some immutable bells and whistles wasabi can’t do -I think they are both going to be certified for Veeam 12 I assume but maybe not? - the other thing that backblaze launched is that they will pay for your eagress to move from different storage as long as you keep the data for a year
The instant Veeam 12 is out I plan to push wasabi and see if I hit any bandwidth or throttle limits - no other justification I can think of for backblaze lock in unless they have some formal Veeam certification that wasabi won’t (which I doubt)
In fact thanks to the comments here I might look into switching one of my big rclone archives to wasabi as well
about the lock with wasabi and aws s3.
wasabi does support that, they called it compliance
both aws and wasabi support MFA using iam polices.
so by default, rclone cannot access any buckets, cannot access any files.
i have a python script that creates an on-the-fly remote using session token and a mfa token.
i feed that to rclone so it can access the bucket.
so i could give you my rclone config file and you could not download or delete files.
and both providers support sse-c client side encryption, as rclone crypt is a no-go for me.
most curios what is lacking in veeam 11 and you are waiting for veeam 12?
We are on an even older Veeam but the two biggest things (so I understand) is actually being able to backup azure virtual machines in a way similar to on prem as well as using s3 / object storage as a primary repository without having to have the on prem copy.
If you have used Veeam for office 365 that’s how it works - it technically has the primary repository on the C:\ but everything is directly offloaded