Backblaze B2 support coming?

I see there has been development to support Backblaze B2 next to Amazon S3. Great!

When can we expect a release with this new feature?
Is it possible to get/test this feature already?

Changelog says it´s in development.

As you can see from the changelog, new updates come about once a month. So i think it´s possible that Backblaze support will be released this month or next month.

1 Like

I had a little hope that support for this would be included in this update. Well too bad.

Is it to be expected that support is included in the next update?

Is it, without too much effort, already possible to use this?

Looks like Backblaze B2 support was removed just before release 0.52 whilst #1899 is resolved. It seems that somebody reported a problem with one VPS provider’s Ubuntu install which raised the question of wider compatibility issues. Looks as though there is a way forward so I guess we can look forward to seeing B2 at some point.

1 Like

Off topic, but just want to ask Blackblaze users why choose BB over Wasabi?

Well, support for any S3 compatible storage is fine with me.

BB is a no brainer for me. I already have a business account with BackBlaze for other needs, and the B2 support comes at no additional cost as long as I stay under their minimums. The MiaB site I maintain stays within those minimums with plenty to spare.

Anyone figured tried using Backblaze B2?

I get the error message:“substring not found”.

Also I am not so sure what to set in “B2 Bucket”, I have tried a lot of combinations

but everything gives the same error message.

Please post an issue in GitHub. This is being reported in another post here in the forum (directly below this one) and someone in MiaB Slack channel.

Created an issue:

1 Like

I had no problem setting up B2 bucket support earlier today. I used only the bucket name itself. My bucket names are randomly generated, and have no whitespace. They use alphanumeric and a few punctuation characters.

I have generated new keys and now it works.
The old application key had “/” in it, maybe that had something to do with it?


That might be a clue. I see you updated the issue over on GitHub with this information. :+1:t3:

same. Generating a new key (without the “/” worked for me as well). New key has a “+” in it but that worked fine