# Backup requires 2x disk space - could the process be improved?

**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/backup-requires-2x-disk-space-could-the-process-be-improved/378486
**Category:** Support
**Tags:** backups
**Created:** [August 13, 2025, 9:06pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/backup-requires-2x-disk-space-could-the-process-be-improved/378486 "2025-08-13T21:06:32Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![omarfilip](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/omarfilip/32/208019_2.png) [@omarfilip](https://meta.discourse.org/u/omarfilip)
#### Post date: [August 13, 2025, 9:06pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/backup-requires-2x-disk-space-could-the-process-be-improved/378486/1 "2025-08-13T21:06:32Z")

</div>

When a backup to S3 runs nightly, it pretty much requires that the disk size be at least 2x the space used. On my 200GB disk, Discourse uses about 50% and during the backup, disk use jumps to just over 90% until the backup is uploaded to S3.

 ![backups takong up disk space](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/meta/original/4X/8/b/9/8b9830dbae07695ebdfe9625b8fb2cc2b32775da.png)

I’m curious if there is a better way to manage disk space. The prompt for my question is the message my Discourse sent me:

> The `download_remote_images_to_local` setting was disabled because the disk space limit at `download_remote_images_threshold` was reached.

It was set at 10%.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Ed\_S](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/ed_s/32/134015_2.png) [@Ed\_S](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ed_S)
#### Post date: [August 14, 2025, 7:51am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/backup-requires-2x-disk-space-could-the-process-be-improved/378486/2 "2025-08-14T07:51:23Z")

</div>

There was a plan:  
[Reduce local disk space needs by not (redundantly) gzipping backups](https://meta.discourse.org/t/reduce-local-disk-space-needs-by-not-redundantly-gzipping-backups/245763)

> [@Reduce local disk space needs by not (redundantly) gzipping backups](https://meta.discourse.org/t/reduce-local-disk-space-needs-by-not-redundantly-gzipping-backups/245763/6):
>
> Development of that feature is currently paused and it isn’t on our current roadmap. I hope we will get to it in 2024.