 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I guess we *could* back up to a hard drive. But I'm not really that keen
> on the idea. We would have to shut the server down to connect the drive,
USB. Or, apparently, something called "eSata" now?
Oh, is your machine back in the prehistoric pre-USB era still? So buy a
$200 desktop machine that *does* have USB, put XP on it or something,
and back it up over the network.
> start it back up again, format the drive,
Format it once, yes.
> copy all the data, somehow verify the data,
They call that "the backup program".
> I don't have any hard evidence to back this up, but isn't power-on the
> most common time for a HD to fail? (Rather like lightbulbs.) Wouldn't
> the constant cycling tend to wear them down?
Once a day is "constant"? Besides, it's your backup drive. Buy two.
Switch back and forth between them. When one fails, buy another.
> The other small problem is that 30 harddrives presumably take up
> slightly more space than 30 DDS tapes. ;-)
Well, yeah, but they also last a lot longer, I expect.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Tom Austin wrote:
>
>>> The other small problem is that 30 harddrives presumably take up
>>> slightly more space than 30 DDS tapes. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> That depends on your backup strategy. If it requires 30 separate
>> media, then yes, storage space can be a premium. Just tuck one or two
>> near QA girls desk and say 'hi' each time you get one ;-)
>
> Right. I'm sold!
>
you can also do this with the tapes - your shelf just can't hold them all.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>> The other small problem is that 30 harddrives presumably take up
>> slightly more space than 30 DDS tapes. ;-)
>
> Well, yeah, but they also last a lot longer, I expect.
>
I've been using HD backups for about 5 years now - never had a failure.
That is not to say it can happen tomorrow - they are more *fragile*.
We do keep them in a padded case for off-site storage - never leave them
in a hot or cold car, etc....
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> I guess we *could* back up to a hard drive. But I'm not really that
>> keen on the idea. We would have to shut the server down to connect the
>> drive,
>
> USB. Or, apparently, something called "eSata" now?
I'm just not keen on attaching and removing bits of hardware on a
server. Our QA guys probably wouldn't like it either.
>> start it back up again, format the drive,
>
> Format it once, yes.
I would anticipate that formatting the drive is quite a lot faster than
trying to actually delete the existing files on it.
>> The other small problem is that 30 harddrives presumably take up
>> slightly more space than 30 DDS tapes. ;-)
>
> Well, yeah, but they also last a lot longer, I expect.
Really? What on earth makes you think that a highly complex and fragile
device like a HD will last longer than a simple lump of tape?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I guess I should go look up prices for LTO tapes...
$20-$40 each in varying lengths
$40 x 8 = $320 ~ 800 GB
@ 15 MBS (LTO-1)
~ 15 hours to fill
LaCie D2 Quadra HD = $560 ~ 1 TB
@ 3 GBS (eSATA)
~ 6 minutes to fill
LaCie Mobile HD = $139 ~ 250 GB
@ 20-25 MBS (USB 2) (driver free, USB powered)
~ 3 hours 30 minutes to fill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:39:22 +0100, Tim Attwood <tim### [at] comcast net>
wrote:
> LaCie D2 Quadra HD = $560 ~ 1 TB
> @ 3 GBS (eSATA)
> ~ 6 minutes to fill
SATA/300 is 3 Gb/s, not 3 GB/s. There is also a 8/10 encoding to take in
to
account, which puts the actual maximum transfer speed to 300 MB/s. No
actual drive can deliver a sustained write speed that high though; a
really fast drive might approach 100 MB/s. At that speed it would take
roughly three hours to fill the disk, assuming that the source disks can
deliver data at the same speed and the CPU can keep up.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> I'm just not keen on attaching and removing bits of hardware on a
> server. Our QA guys probably wouldn't like it either.
That's what USB is *for*. But as I say, plug the backup machine into the
net next to the server, and back up over the network. Works fine. It's
how I do it.
> I would anticipate that formatting the drive is quite a lot faster than
> trying to actually delete the existing files on it.
Oh, if you want to delete everything, I suppose. If you're only putting
one backup file on there, it's probably equally fast.
> Really? What on earth makes you think that a highly complex and fragile
> device like a HD will last longer than a simple lump of tape?
Experience. Do you really think you can rewrite a tape 10,000 times?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I'm just not keen on attaching and removing bits of hardware on a
>> server. Our QA guys probably wouldn't like it either.
>
> That's what USB is *for*.
Maybe I'm just twitchy because of that scanner I just installed. Some
guy bought a cheap-looking business card scanner. It comes with a
hackish-looking program that lets you press a button and scan a business
card and insert it into your Outlook contacts list. (Huh? I don't get
how that's physically possible...)
On one PC, it puts the PC into an infinite loop where the "Found New
Hardware" wizard keeps popping up and won't **** off. The hardware also
won't work. On other PC, every time you plug it in it *demands* the
product installation CD. Won't do anything without it. And often doesn't
work the first time. You gotta go through several iterations of
uninstalling and reinstalling the driver, rebooting the PC, and
performing voodoo chants over a burning candle. And then, eventually, it
works. And it keeps working - until the next time you unplug it.
I have no idea WTF all that is about! But doing that kind of crap with a
server just makes me damn nervous...
> But as I say, plug the backup machine into the
> net next to the server, and back up over the network. Works fine. It's
> how I do it.
It has a flavour...
>> I would anticipate that formatting the drive is quite a lot faster
>> than trying to actually delete the existing files on it.
>
> Oh, if you want to delete everything, I suppose. If you're only putting
> one backup file on there, it's probably equally fast.
Our backup software has a "backup to folder" option, but it works like a
file copy. IME, deleting millions of files isn't "fast"...
>> Really? What on earth makes you think that a highly complex and
>> fragile device like a HD will last longer than a simple lump of tape?
>
> Experience. Do you really think you can rewrite a tape 10,000 times?
Well, most of the tapes we own were put into service long before I
joined the company, and they're still going strong. (Now and then we
have a tape go dud and I replace it.) That's plenty long enough for me...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>SATA/300 is 3 Gb/s, not 3 GB/s. There is also a 8/10 encoding to take into
>account, which puts the actual maximum transfer speed to 300 MB/s. No
>actual drive can deliver a sustained write speed that high though; a
>really fast drive might approach 100 MB/s. At that speed it would take
>roughly three hours to fill the disk, assuming that the source disks can
>deliver data at the same speed and the CPU can keep up.
Ah, I misread something, still that's at least 150 MB/s, faster
than the HD will go.
They do make faster tape drives with more storage, but it
sounds like Andy's company might as well re-use the old
hardware. I bet it's one of those machines you could dig
out of a building collapse and still recover the data. And
if they compress the data they probably can fit a 160 GB
backup onto a single tape.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I have no idea WTF all that is about!
I don't know. Let me suggest that a hard drive isn't going to be as
problematic. :-)
>> But as I say, plug the backup machine into the net next to the server,
>> and back up over the network. Works fine. It's how I do it.
>
> It has a flavour...
That must be some British expression I'm not familiar with...
> Our backup software has a "backup to folder" option, but it works like a
> file copy. IME, deleting millions of files isn't "fast"...
Odd. No, deleting millions of files isn't fast. What's wrong with the
backup software that comes with Windows?
But as you say, partition the disk so you can use one partition per
backup, and format over the drive each time.
You're much luckier than I was with tapes. Probably because your company
is buying high-quality tapes.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
