compare speed vs arqbakcup

[TheBestPessimist]

Hello,

I am a user of arqbackup, and i am interested in a comparison with between the 2 as well, should that be possible.

Thank you in advance.

[gilbertchen]

I don't own a copy of arqbackup and will leave this task to someone else.

Arqbackup doesn't seem to support scripting, so the tests may need to be run manually.

[TheBestPessimist]

There's no need to own it. The 30 days trial should be enough. Maybe I'll try and do it. Your product send interesting but please don't feel offended if i say that somehow it didn't come me the same feeling of maturity and stability arq gives.

[gilbertchen]

Please do it. Results from you would be more convincing than from me.

Duplicacy is a relatively new project so it may not appear as mature as Arq, however the true advantage is the design that enables many advanced features as well as a less error-prone implementation. If you haven't read it, there is a discussion in which one of our users shared his experiences with many backup tools including Arq and explained why Duplicacy's approach is the right way to go: https://duplicacy.com/issue?id=5651874166341632

[TheBestPessimist]

Oh i have read A LOT on your support/forum. Also issues on GitHub (for example i would really like to have saved empty folders as well.)

Also (maybe i missed this one) what about windows/mac file properties and extended attributes? Do you save those?

For testing i would like to use the GUI version, since I'm that kind of a person, and also my gf doesn't do command line. She's just a normal Mac user, so a good GUI is important to her.

[TheBestPessimist]

An update to this:
for a folder containing 3 copies of linux kernel sources, a 30 GB vm and some other stuff (56 GB of data, 180k files, 13k folders), backend storage gdrive and 64 threads

• duplicacy took about 5 hours to finish
• arqbackup took more than 13 hours.

All in all duplicacy seems way faster than arq.

[joemiller]

@TheBestPessimist Thanks for doing those tests. Have you also done restore comparisons between duplicacy -vs- arq?

[TheBestPessimist]

Nnnnnope!

I'm using duplicacy as main backup since january 2018 (i think) and haven't tried arq in the meantime.

[helmbrandt]

can anyone help me with this script? I can't get it to run @gilbertchen @dpc @bbigras @clbn

[TheBestPessimist]

@helmbrandt can't help if you don't tell anything about the problem. Plus: there's no arqbackup script done.

[helmbrandt]

@TheBestPessimist maybe you can check my Issue #15 I don't know how to run the check

[odkr]

I did just play around with Duplicacity v2.6.1 and Arq v6.2.44. This isn't a proper benchmark, I didn't bother to make sure that both programmes run under comparable conditions, I just made encrypted backups to my NAS over Wi-fi. I also didn't bother to make sure that they backup the same set of files (Arq 6 excludes a lot of files by defaut). But, all that said, here are the 'results':

Arq 6 scanned 86 GiB of data and created a 50 GiB backup in about 4h.
Duplicacy scanned about 91 GiB of data and created a 60 GiB backup in about 3,5h.
However, Arq apears to use less CPU time than Duplicacy.