Hi, Garuda recently (i think) and i am still using timeshift and I already looked into the diffrences but only found that snapper is from suse, timeshift from someone and that snapper is better because it can make acttual back-ups to another drive. Is there anything else i missed? or can i just continue to use timesihift aslong as i dont dot external backups with it?
First, you can use whatever you prefer. If you are happy with timeshift there is no reason to switch.
I wrote about some of the advantages that snapper has over timeshift in the first post here.
Snapper is a newer addition to the Garuda configuration. If you wanted to try it out it would put you in a better position to provide feedback about your experience using it, which could help make improvements or adjustments in the future.
You are certainly welcome to keep using timeshift. As far as I know, no one is going to take it away from you.
Keep in mind, if you are not using a separate drive you are not making a true backup--regardless of your backup routine. Disk failure or damage to your disk can also destroy any data tucked away in btrfs subvolumes, or any other safety nets that are stored on the same physical drive.
Is there a thread where those feedbacks are provided, exchanged and discussed?
I'll search a bit more...
Personally, I prefer snapper. But, my first experience with snapshot backup was Garuda's snapper setup. Manjaro used timeshift by default and the reason I switched it to snapper everywhere was because I have a multi-boot setup on a single root btrfs subvolume with each distro its own subvol to nest into. Timeshift didn't like this setup and wouldn't work with btrfs snapshots and only would do rsync which is painfully slow. If you are doing a normal single OS partition layout, i believe they are both similar in functionality.
Thanks this helped a lot but what kind of errors can happen when restoring? and can they happen when i try to resurect my system after an failed update or if I mess up some important config?
Thanks I use nextcloud for my important data timeshitft or maybe snaper are just there to keep me from messing up important stuff.
And Thank y'all for the help
I still use last year's ISO for my systems which comes with Timeshift.
This is because I customized my Garuda installs to run under EXT4 FS instead of BTRFS. Timeshift works under ext4 using RSync system. I will not touch BTRFS with a 1000 mile pole for my production machines, as I don't trust that FS due to the data lost I experienced under it many years ago. The sting is still there after all these years.
I understand where you're coming from. but that was then, and this is now. BTRFS has come a long ways lately, and more distributions are jumping on board with it as the default these days.
I do however use ext4 for my large data drives, as if anything did happen, file recovery software is far more supported on ext4. For my system drives BTRFS is perfect because of its snapshot features. Even if something unthinkable happened to my system drive, I don't store any data there anyways, (so it wouldn't be a catastrophe by any means).
I don't really need BTRFS snapshot feature, given that I own a perpetual license of Acronis True Image. I just create full image of my drives twice a month with it, as it supports ext4, but not BTRFS. Besides, maintaining a system image on a separate external disk is safer than anything stored locally on the machine.
I simply use dd to do a sector by sector copy (image) to another SSD (using an SSD hot swap rack). No extra backup software required.
I like the belt and suspenders approach.
It's interesting how we all have different ways of managing our systems.
I use snapshots in order to test every single change to a package before I implement it in my primary subvolume (you know how Arch works). But I do not use Snapper nor Timeshift, as they do not answer my requirements. Which makes my comment here somewhat off topic.
So by the use of my custom snapshot scripts, it's a full system snapshoted and ready to boot through GRUB, so every behavior during my tests is 100% representative to production. That is super important to me.
I also btrfs-send my backup snapshots to external SSDs so that if my drive explodes, I swap in the other and it's as if nothing happened.
btrfs snapshots and btrfs-send are extremely quick and on a live system so I make backups at least every day and have cron running my custom scripts all the time. I manually launch my scripts for specific snaphots and I have a set used as Paru (Pacman) hooks for pre-transaction.
So far running with this setup for 1 year and never had one single flaw and allowed me to test a bunch of packages, root configs, user configs, etc. It also saved me from crying badly at least 12 times. loll
In the end as long as we can control our backup method and we are happy with it, then we do it the right way for our own peace of mind.
I like the commercial program I purchased, as it offers optimal compression of my image. I don't wish to store entire bits of my SSD including the zeros (free space). That way I can continue experimenting with my Frankenstein Garuda install. I don't need the support from the developers given that I have enough safety net in place. I do highly appreciate Garuda Linux for its courage of being different yet still the same Arch family.
Seems a little pricey but glad it works for you.
Acronis true image can sometimes be had for free with purchase of some brands of hard drives (at least in the past) and it is a good imaging program. I have used it extensively in the past, and I must warn you that like any program you may experience bugs. I have suffered several instances of a failure to restore an image in the past from Acronis TI program bugs. As well, they have at times changed their image format in different program versions in the past making old images incompatible with the newer program version. So, commercial programs do have there drawbacks as well as benefits.
The thing is I don't upgrade any longer past version 2020. The last version is 2021, as the program completely re-branded and re-imaged itself for the 2022 version.