#Backblaze vs idrive software
Our top choices for the Backup Software category are: Avamar, Vembu BDR Suite, VMWare vCenter Server. We know that not all businesses have the time to scrutinize dozens of various services, so we created a list of suggestions that you may find useful. An effective, simple tip is to write the pros and cons of both solutions next to each other and check which app comes on top. Check out their strong and low points and find out which software is a more sensible choice for your company. Backblaze (84%) for user satisfaction rating. Backblaze (8.8) for overall quality and efficiency IDrive (100%) vs. Not sure if IDrive, or Backblaze is the better choice for your needs No problem Check Capterra’s comparison, take a look at features, product details, pricing, and read verified user reviews. Likewise, you may get a quick idea of their overall effectiveness and customer feedback by having a look at our smart scoring system. To find out which solution meets your requirements, think about comparing various solutions feature by feature along with their conditions and prices.
#Backblaze vs idrive full
But in full disclosure, if your application is only single threaded, yes, B2 tends to be 20% slower for that 1 thread.What is better IDrive or Backblaze? Various firms need different types of Backup Software. If you aren't using enough of your bandwidth, spawn a few more threads (on either platform) and soak your upload capacity.
#Backblaze vs idrive free
Practically speaking, for most people in most applications, this means both Amazon S3 and Backblaze B2 are essentially free of any limitations. This was all designed originally so that 1 million individual laptops could upload backups all at the same time with no issues and no load balancers. What this means is that in B2 40 threads are actually uploading to 40 separate servers in 40 separate "vaults" and none of the threads could possibly know the other threads are uploading and it does not "choke" through a load balancer. The B2 API is slightly better in that we don't go through any load balancers like S3 does, so there is no choke point. We aren't even sure what Amazon is doing differently, but they can be a little faster in general for 1 thread (some people only see 20% faster, some see as high as 50% faster, might be latency to the datacenter and where you are located).Īs long as you use multiple threads, I make the radical claim that B2 can be faster than Amazon S3. This is "generally true" for 1 upload thread. But if a meteor hits that 1 datacenter and wipes out all of the equipment in a 1 mile blast radius, you won't be getting that data back unless you have a backup somewhere else.ĭisclaimer: I work for Backblaze so I'm biased. This helps insulate against failures like if one rack loses power (like if a power strip goes bad or a circuit breaker blows). In the one copy in one region in Backblaze B2, any file is "sharded" across 20 different servers in 20 different racks in 20 different locations inside that datacenter. So if this kind of redundancy is important to you for mission critical reasons Backblaze B2 would only be half as expensive as one copy in Amazon S3, not 1/4 as expensive. To get a copy in two locations you have to pay twice as much and take some actions.
To be absolutely clear, if you only upload and store and pay for 1 copy of your Backblaze B2 data, it is living in one region. Quietly the US-West is actually three separate data centers, but your data will only really land in 1 datacenter somewhere in US-West based on a few internal factors. Last I checked, Backblaze still stores most data in 1 location, no?īackblaze now has multiple regions! One in Europe (Netherlands) and one is called "US-West".
0 kommentar(er)
