Does Linix 6.9 kernal make restic redundant for Linix?

Hello, I am a Windows’ user with some db use on unix. This article https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/13/linux_kernel_69_released/ says that storage deduplication has been optionally added to a file system.

Questions?
Does this mean that restic will become redundant for Linux and thus no longer be supported at all? Restic provides some more functionality than just deduplication and compression but there will there be a split between the linix version and the Windows’ version?
What are your thoughts?

1 Like

Many files systems offer compression too - does it make compression software obsolete?:slight_smile:

restic (or similar backup software) is a bit more than just deduplication and compression.

Not sure what your thinking process is and why you consider that some Linux kernel features will make backup software redundant. I do not see any logical connection here.

2 Likes

Set up a mount point with compression and deduplication. Create a directory on the mount point with the name in the style which has the date. Copy all data that you want to backup that directory. Repeat the directory creation and copy on each day you want backups. There is no need for Restic because all of the data is deduplicated and compressed by the OS file system.
I have a fantasy that the OS software must be so thoroughly tested there are no bugs in it.

You could do this for many years with for example ZFS filesystem (it is well tested and rock solid stable). But real time deduplication completely transparent to the OS or user comes at cost. RAM and CPU mostly. If you can dedicate powerful system to store your backups then sure why not. You will still need restic or similar to store your backups in some cloud. And latter is probably what is real restic strength - ability to store efficiently your backup on relatively slow and high latency storage (cloud).

ZFS also allows you to backup/replicate data remotely (as efficient as restic if not better) but only to another ZFS powered system. Solutions like this are nothing new but occupy slightly different space than restic.

Thank you for you thoughts.

1 Like

I agree, there’s nothing about that feature (in the Linux kernel) that makes restic more or less redundant. They cater to two different use cases, both have their place :slight_smile:

1 Like

You appear to think that the local disk can also be a backup, and more importantly is sufficient as a backup. Please read up on the 3-2-1 rule at least, if not the newer 3-2-1-1-0 rule.

2 Likes

Set up a mount point with compression and deduplication. Create a directory on the mount point with the name in the style which has the date […]

How would this work if I want my backup on Google drive or some other backend that rclone supports? Or perhaps an ssh/sftp directory I have access to on some remote server?