Best Forum Backup Solution

[Dan18]

Local Server backup using Eva's script and Separate server rsnapshot/rsync.

 

[r3v0lution]

I have made backups in cPanel with the Site Backup Pro that is offered.. But as others have said, I read NOT to trust those.

I did download the [SolidMean]Forum Backup and got it all set up... But how do you go about restoring with that one?? I am still rather new to XF so I apologize if its an easy solution. I just have not found it yet. In phpbb and Wordperss (which is what I am more familiar with) you could easily make backups and restore from ACP.

 

[PacMan]

that's why periodically I do a manual backup of my database (which you can do from cpanel) and download it to my home computer -- just in case.

Why not get a NAS like a Qnap and automate this and have the NAS pull backups on a daily basis?

 

[Joeychgo]

Why not get a NAS like a Qnap and automate this and have the NAS pull backups on a daily basis?

just never bothered.

 

[eva2000]

Why not get a NAS like a Qnap and automate this and have the NAS pull backups on a daily basis?

faster bandwidth pipe if you have backup servers with nice network speeds - you'd not going to get 60-100MB/s transfer speeds via a local NAS to your web server unless you're on Google's 1-2Gbps ISP plans heh

 

[PacMan]

faster bandwidth pipe if you have backup servers with nice network speeds - you'd not going to get 60-100MB/s transfer speeds via a local NAS to your web server unless you're on Google's 1-2Gbps ISP plans heh

In my case, my NAS backs up my backup server with rsync.

 

[Joeychgo]

These things are also not of value to your average forum owner. They aren't running dedicated boxes, and many aren't even running VPS.

My point was and is, if your on shared hosting or a VPS, you should look for a host that offers included backups with your hosting. If you want to do extra beyond that then that's great. But start with your hosting.

 

[esquire]

Why not get a NAS like a Qnap and automate this and have the NAS pull backups on a daily basis?

It's actually incredibly cool.... although make sure you get the right one. I have the TS-212P which I bought because it was on sale for some ridiculously low price (I think it was like $80 at the time.) It's fast enough for serving certain things. But if you want to use it to back up lots of small files... the unit will probably expire before backing up thousands of files, lol. I have a few Synology and Netgear (all atom chips) that are faster and these are good IF you have already tarred/compressed the files into a single large file so that it's just a matter of offline transfer. Truth is I'd like to do more with the other drives, like rsync but what I have for most (cpanel and local and remote backups) seems to work quite well along with periodic testing.

 

[PacMan]

It's actually incredibly cool.... although make sure you get the right one. I have the TS-212P which I bought because it was on sale for some ridiculously low price (I think it was like $80 at the time.) It's fast enough for serving certain things.

I backup my Qnap with a Synology ds212j which I picked up for a very low price and threw in some drives I had laying around Both NAS have been running for years with no issues.

 

[PacMan]

My point was and is, if your on shared hosting or a VPS, you should look for a host that offers included backups with your hosting. If you want to do extra beyond that then that's great. But start with your hosting.

I would never trust this. The backups the host performs will probably be on the same server. So if the server goes, so does your backup.

 

[Deathstarr]

never rely on your web host, most of the time they take an image of their server which means that they can not just restore 1 hosting account.

 

[esquire]

I would never trust this. The backups the host performs will probably be on the same server. So if the server goes, so does your backup.

But the drives are different and data on them should be fine. It really depends upon (a) what type of account you have, (b) where you host, and (c) what you're willing to pay. If you think that $3 per month will be fine to host your site and provide a reliable backup, you're kidding yourself. It should work fine but it may not and nobody is being paid to ensure that they are. And there is risk that it won't work or that what you thought was backed up wasn't in the manner you had intended. I know of $10 per month hosts that do a fine job for most people in this regard. But if your site is worth it to you, then consider altering any or all of the above 3 variables to make sure you're spending what it should cost for someone to provide you with adequate service and minimizing the need to cut corners.

 

[Deathstarr]

Sorry, But no matter how much you pay per month or per year even, Never leave backup to your web host. Their are affordable options out there that is cheaper then $3 a month that works.

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1527281

 

[esquire]

Sorry, But no matter how much you pay per month or per year even, Never leave backup to your web host. Their are affordable options out there that is cheaper then $3 a month that works.

Perhaps it may - but it's the same story with any product or service you purchase. If the amount of money seems to provide more than it should, it means that there are almost certainly corners being cut in order to stay in the black. That's just pure math.

In fairness I'm associated with Cheap VPS - a low cost VPS webhosting company. This isn't a plug because I doubt it will be what most here will want and is only for those who know what they are doing with linux-based webhosting and who are best left to themselves. Everything costs money - the data center, the pipe, the credit card processing, fraud detection and human labor. The only way you win is by volume on the cheap and it's harder to do with customers that need help, such as shared hosting. Virtually all the shared hosting "business plans" wrapped up like some premier offer are crap. They aren't offering you better or more reliable service. They are just giving you more crap you don't need (like an extra 20 domains you can use instead of the 15 you have, of which 10 you're not using and you'll probably never exceed single digits. There is also no "hit" they take offering it, e.g. like an extra 10GB of space on a 1TB hard drive. These are all virtual numbers with a performance hit IF used but no loss up front. They host a ton of accounts on the same server and it's all sink or swim - same goes with your performance. And if you're a forum they will hate you since you'll use up far more resources than a simple blog.

My suggestion is that you go with a mid-sized, reliable webhost if you're doing shared hosting for a forum. They will cost more although quite a bit less than a managed VPS. And if it costs you $12-15 per month, you really shouldn't be complaining. That's pretty awesome for hosting that should be fast enough, reliable enough and have a backup system that works for you. But if your forum gets far beyond just a growing hobby and you find that you've got a few dozen concurrent users and 100,000+ posts and activity, you should consider just getting a VPS and spending the $30+ a month to do it right. Your phone costs you $50 and your site should be able to come close with ads to making it worth your while... and if it isn't, I know people who spend more on their pet in a week. Like anything in life, if it's important, don't skimp.

 

[motowebmaster]

I have two different automated backups per 24-Hour period, and have relied on one or the other for restoration of a site. One technology/process is backed up to a SAN within the same data center - the other is backed up to secured cloud storage.

They are both predominantly shell script based. As previously pointed out, it does help to have access to your own server and learn to use command line and shell script tools. They have saved me several times over the years.

Many years ago, I used to utilize commercial backup solutions. In most cases they weren't reliable. Primarily because it was difficult for me to test them before they were needed.

 

[tomrob]

I use backupsy.com hosting and just run a script that connects to my server over SSH.

The first part of that script makes a backup of the database using mysqldump. The second part uses rsync to copy all files to the backup server.

Works very well, and is not expensive $12/month for 500GB.

 

[PacMan]

I use backupsy.com hosting and just run a script that connects to my server over SSH.

The first part of that script makes a backup of the database using mysqldump. The second part uses rsync to copy all files to the backup server.

Works very well, and is not expensive $12/month for 500GB.

Do you have to maintain the server or is everything patched automatically (ie security patches)?

BTW, there is a coupon for 40% (top right corner) off when you visit their site.

 

[DigNap15]

Hi i am using XF and Siteground is my webhost.
They do daily backups (for 30 days)
And I can do a maraul backup on their site if I want to.

But I want to have my forum backed up to my own local hard drive for my peace of mind.
Siteground do not use Cpanel, they have thier own system.

I think I need to backup or export my sql database and backup up my forum (two operations)
What do you think
And how often, weekly?

 

[Ryan Ashbrook]

If your host (and any good host will) does their own backups then I wouldn't, personally, worry about it - but, if you must, then yes weekly is generally good to do a manual backup. In the event of total catastrophe with your host and their dailies aren't available for some reason, then you'll only lose a few days of content restoring from your own copies.

 

[zappaDPJ]

If your host (and any good host will) does their own backups then I wouldn't, personally, worry about it

I would still worry about it for at least two reasons. Although catastrophic host failures are rare, when I do hear about them it's not unusual to read about issues restoring from backup. I'd also keep in mind that there many kinds of failure such as the administrators seizing assets to pay off debtors as a host goes bust or an unintended event caused by a site staff member which goes to backup.

Secondly in the event of a failure, it's often far quicker to upload a local backup of your site rather than wait for the hosting company to restore from backup.

Although you will probably never need it I would always keep a local/off-site backup of your site and database just to be sure. I've seen the fallout when three years of medical research was lost due to a host/backup failure and it wasn't pretty.