Data Storage - Tape Backup

Author

Tape Backup

chrisisasavage@hotmail.com

2005-01-13, 5:46 pm

I am looking for opinions on what a decent tape backup for a PC
workstation might be, somewhere around 40 gigs or so, speed is not the
biggest issue, mostly being reasonablly priced and around 40 gigs (give
or take a few). I'm wondering what people think the better brands are
for this type of applications, and if possible, a suggestion on a
model.

Thanks

Brian K

2005-01-13, 5:46 pm

On 01/13/2005 4:00 PM chrisisasavage@hotmail.com wrote:

>I am looking for opinions on what a decent tape backup for a PC
>workstation might be, somewhere around 40 gigs or so, speed is not the
>biggest issue, mostly being reasonablly priced and around 40 gigs (give
>or take a few). I'm wondering what people think the better brands are
>for this type of applications, and if possible, a suggestion on a
>model.
>
>Thanks
>
>
>
What do you consider "reasonably priced"? I used to use an Onstream
tape drive for backups. But it died and Onstream has been out of
business for two years. I am currently looking at external HDD for
backup. I shopped around for tape drives. I found the least expensive
being $1,099. and that was for a 10 GB tape drive.

--
________
To email me, Edit "xt" from my email address.
Brian M. Kochera
"Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!"
View My Web Page: http://home.earthlink.net/~brian1951

2005-01-13, 5:46 pm

I am a fan of hard disk storage used for backup, BUT, I was recently in a
computer store and saw a product marketed by ZIP that had a storage capacity
of (I think) 35-90GB. I think it was tape. Knowing ZIP products are
marketed towards the average PC user (and priced accordingly), you might
want to browse their website and see what they have to offer.

--Dan

<chrisisasavage@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1105650059.340774.306560@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>I am looking for opinions on what a decent tape backup for a PC
> workstation might be, somewhere around 40 gigs or so, speed is not the
> biggest issue, mostly being reasonablly priced and around 40 gigs (give
> or take a few). I'm wondering what people think the better brands are
> for this type of applications, and if possible, a suggestion on a
> model.
>
> Thanks
>

Lynn

2005-01-13, 8:46 pm

> What do you consider "reasonably priced"? I used to use an Onstream tape drive for backups. But it died and Onstream has been
> out of business for two years. I am currently looking at external HDD for backup. I shopped around for tape drives. I found
> the least expensive being $1,099. and that was for a 10 GB tape drive.

Whoa, Travan tape drives are very reasonably priced ! 20/40 GB
for $299 and the tapes are $40 each.
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProdu...-113-121&depa=0

But, I would use an external hard drive with Robocopy.

Lynn

J. Clarke

2005-01-14, 2:45 am

dg wrote:

> I am a fan of hard disk storage used for backup, BUT, I was recently in a
> computer store and saw a product marketed by ZIP that had a storage
> capacity
> of (I think) 35-90GB. I think it was tape. Knowing ZIP products are
> marketed towards the average PC user (and priced accordingly), you might
> want to browse their website and see what they have to offer.

It's an Iomega product but it's not a Zip and it's not a tape, it's called a
"REV" and it's a removable-media disk. The drive is 300 bucks and the
disks cost about the same as hard disks of slightly larger capacity.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> --Dan
>
> <chrisisasavage@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1105650059.340774.306560@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke

2005-01-14, 2:45 am

Lynn wrote:

>
> Whoa, Travan tape drives are very reasonably priced ! 20/40 GB
> for $299 and the tapes are $40 each.
>
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProdu...-113-121&depa=0

Travan drives are pieces of shit and the tapes cost more than 200 gig LTOs.
Tape drives are one place where you get what you pay for.

Think about it--40 bucks a pop for 20 gig tapes (forget the "20/40" crap,
they're 20 gig) vs 46 for a 40 gig disk.

> But, I would use an external hard drive with Robocopy.
>
> Lynn

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Mike Tomlinson

2005-01-14, 2:45 am

In article <cs71p4$ofh@library1.airnews.net>, Lynn <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.com>
writes

>Whoa, Travan tape drives are very reasonably priced !

They're also a pile of unreliable shite.

> 20/40 GB
>for $299 and the tapes are $40 each.

I pity you if you think $40 per tape is "reasonably priced".

--
..sigmonster on vacation

Arno Wagner

2005-01-14, 5:45 pm

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage chrisisasavage@hotmail.com wrote:
> I am looking for opinions on what a decent tape backup for a PC
> workstation might be, somewhere around 40 gigs or so, speed is not the
> biggest issue, mostly being reasonablly priced and around 40 gigs (give
> or take a few). I'm wondering what people think the better brands are
> for this type of applications, and if possible, a suggestion on a
> model.

Forget it. Tape is today only cost-effective if you have huge volumes
of data in tape libraries, e.g. >100TB.

Other backup media are (my subjective list):

Medium...high reliability, medium lifetime, medium cost, high capacity:
- HDDs in external enclosures or removable drive bays

Low reliability, low lifetime, high cost, medium capacity:
- Non-professional tape (Dat, Travan)

Low reliability, low lifetime, low cost, low capacity:
- CD-R, DVD+/-R(W)

High reliability, high lifetime, medium cost, low capacity:
- MOD (3.5"), DVD-RAM

To long-term store lower volumes of critical (family photos,
diploma thesis, etc.) data use MOD or DVD-RAM.

For backups with small sizes use MOD, DVD-RAM or HDDs.
For backups with large sizes use HDDs.

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Irwin

2005-01-14, 5:46 pm

Arno,

Why are CD-R and DVD+-R unreliable and short lived? I really don't
know. You say HDD are reliable and medium life. I have never dropped a
hard drive, but I have dropped a lot of backup CD-R, and I am guessing
that the CD-R tolerate physical abuse a lot better. Now granted, I have
burned many a Drive Image CD, only to find that they don't verify
correctly. I never did understand where exactly the problem was in
that, was it software, burner, or medium? I guess that would qualify as
unreliable. It was be pretty devastating to try to restore a CD-R image
only to find that it was invalid and was your only backup. Actually, I
think that has happened to me before, I seem to remember. Is a
validated CD-R still unreliable and short-lived?

I have some old HDD on a shelf in anti-static bags, and I don't
consider them particularly convenient. Also, how long does a HDD hold
data before it starts to corrupt?

IMF

Neil Maxwell

2005-01-14, 5:46 pm

On 14 Jan 2005 08:06:40 -0800, "Irwin" <ebct@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Arno,
>
>Why are CD-R and DVD+-R unreliable and short lived?

CDR and DVDR are more reliable if verified, as you stated, but the
long-term life of them is unpredictable. If you're only counting on
them for 3 month lifetimes, you're probably OK, but if you want them
to last for a few years or more, you're playing with fire.

I like using HD as the primary backup, then archiving the backup files
to DVDR every now and again. This gives you several levels with
different failure mechanisms, and the DVDRs don't age enough to be a
very high risk.

--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer

J. Clarke

2005-01-14, 5:46 pm

Irwin wrote:

> Arno,
>
> Why are CD-R and DVD+-R unreliable and short lived?

Whether they are or not depends on the particular chemistry--some last a
good long time when properly stored but don't count on it unless you're
sure you know what you're getting.

> I really don't
> know. You say HDD are reliable and medium life. I have never dropped a
> hard drive, but I have dropped a lot of backup CD-R, and I am guessing
> that the CD-R tolerate physical abuse a lot better.

Some kinds yes, others no. A hard disk shock-mounted in a removable tray
will take quite a lot of abuse, a laptop drive even more. One thing you
are not going to do is scratch the data off a hard disk by dragging
something across it.

> Now granted, I have
> burned many a Drive Image CD, only to find that they don't verify
> correctly. I never did understand where exactly the problem was in
> that, was it software, burner, or medium? I guess that would qualify as
> unreliable. It was be pretty devastating to try to restore a CD-R image
> only to find that it was invalid and was your only backup. Actually, I
> think that has happened to me before, I seem to remember. Is a
> validated CD-R still unreliable and short-lived?
>
> I have some old HDD on a shelf in anti-static bags, and I don't
> consider them particularly convenient. Also, how long does a HDD hold
> data before it starts to corrupt?

Put those disks in inexpensive trays and they become a lot more convenient.
You'll find that disk is actually competitive with travan tape in cost and
is much more flexible in terms of options for backup strategies (you can
use anything from xcopy to high end enterprise backup software, you can
back up to RAID, can do all sorts of things that you can't do with tape)
and vastly superior in terms of transfer rate and scalability (when you
need 200 gig of backup, if there is a Travan that large available at all
it's not going to be cheap and won't use your existing tapes, but stick a
250 gig disk in a tray and it plugs right in where your old 40 came out,
with no changes at all needed.

As to how long a hard disk holds data, I don't know a specific answer to
that--I've never had one lose data that had not failed outright. Since
they depend on magnetic servo tracks for their operation they should hold
data uncorrupted as long as the drive operates.

> IMF

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Paul Rubin

2005-01-14, 5:46 pm

Neil Maxwell <neil.maxwell@intel.com> writes:
> CDR and DVDR are more reliable if verified, as you stated, but the
> long-term life of them is unpredictable. If you're only counting on
> them for 3 month lifetimes, you're probably OK, but if you want them
> to last for a few years or more, you're playing with fire.

High quality CDR (e.g. Mitsui Archive Gold) have undergone a lot of
testing and seem to be quite stable for long periods. The jury is
still out for DVDR. Hard drives contain all kinds of seals, filters,
lubricants on mechanical parts, and flash memory parameters and
firmware dependent on floating charges, all of which can decay over a
period of years. Hard drives are quite unreliable for long term
storage.

Al Dykes

2005-01-14, 5:46 pm

In article <462gu0t9vcernodg05i2dpn5oe1hskbn1g@4ax.com>,
Neil Maxwell <neil.maxwell@intel.com> wrote:
>On 14 Jan 2005 08:06:40 -0800, "Irwin" <ebct@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>CDR and DVDR are more reliable if verified, as you stated, but the
>long-term life of them is unpredictable. If you're only counting on
>them for 3 month lifetimes, you're probably OK, but if you want them
>to last for a few years or more, you're playing with fire.
>
>I like using HD as the primary backup, then archiving the backup files
>to DVDR every now and again. This gives you several levels with
>different failure mechanisms, and the DVDRs don't age enough to be a
>very high risk.
>
>
>--
>Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer

The ability to read a DVD written on one brand of burner on any other
reader scares me. I'd do a readback on at least one PC of another
brand to test it.

You also need several generations of backup, and never overwrite your
best backup. (this applies to disks and re-writable media.)

Unless you've actually tested a restore to bare iron you don't
know if your disaster recovery plan will work when you need it.

These days I do image backups to a pair of big disks in another
computer on my LAN, (these disks are synced in case one dies) and I
backup my data (mostly "My Documents") with some sync software that
keeps my laptop in sync with my desktop machine.

test test test .

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

Arno Wagner

2005-01-15, 2:45 am

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Irwin <ebct@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Arno,

> Why are CD-R and DVD+-R unreliable and short lived? I really don't
> know.
My personal experience and that of people I know. The shortest CD-R life
I had so far was 5 minutes. It burned. It verified fine, 5 minutes later
the same drive could not read it. The problem is not so much that all
media are bad, but that quality and durability varies widely with no
way for the user to know which media are good and which are not. In
addition the burner/firmware/medium combination makes a huge difference.

> You say HDD are reliable and medium life.

Medium = 5..20 years. The HDD manufacturers only state 5 year component
life. The problem is that there are components on HDDs (e.g. electrolyte
capacitors) that have a limited lifetime, even more so when unused.
Also part of the reliabaility claim is that you can suffer a complete
media loss if you drop them.

> I have never dropped a
> hard drive, but I have dropped a lot of backup CD-R, and I am guessing
> that the CD-R tolerate physical abuse a lot better.

Yes: Mechanical on the underside. No: Scratches on the top, sunlight.

> Now granted, I have
> burned many a Drive Image CD, only to find that they don't verify
> correctly. I never did understand where exactly the problem was in
> that, was it software, burner, or medium?

All three (if you count the firmware of the drive as part of the software).

> I guess that would qualify as
> unreliable. It was be pretty devastating to try to restore a CD-R image
> only to find that it was invalid and was your only backup. Actually, I
> think that has happened to me before, I seem to remember. Is a
> validated CD-R still unreliable and short-lived?

In my experience, that is unfortunately so.

> I have some old HDD on a shelf in anti-static bags, and I don't
> consider them particularly convenient. Also, how long does a HDD hold
> data before it starts to corrupt?

Data corruption should take >>10 years. However HDDs for backups are
best done with the HDDs in removable drive bays or UDB/FireWire/SATA
external enclosures, which also protect the drive so some degree.

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Arno Wagner

2005-01-15, 2:45 am

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Neil Maxwell <neil.maxwell@intel.com> writes:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> High quality CDR (e.g. Mitsui Archive Gold) have undergone a lot of
> testing and seem to be quite stable for long periods. The jury is
> still out for DVDR. Hard drives contain all kinds of seals, filters,
> lubricants on mechanical parts, and flash memory parameters and
> firmware dependent on floating charges, all of which can decay over a
> period of years. Hard drives are quite unreliable for long term
> storage.

Indeed. The only good solutions for long-term storage is professional
tape intended for long-term storage (check the specs), MOD and (to a
lesser degree, since it is newer technology) DVD-RAM.

If you don't drop or overheat them, HDD reliability if fine for
regular backups. (Backup != long-term storage.)

I agree that DVD+/-R(W) is unclear at the moment. However the
German computer magazine c't does regular tests of burner/medium
combinations and has burned disks evaluated with professional
equipment. It does not look good. The same "speed before
reliability" marketing-driven philosophy that we know from CD-R
seems to be the current trend there.

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Arno Wagner

2005-01-15, 2:45 am

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Al Dykes <adykes@panix.com> wrote:
> In article <462gu0t9vcernodg05i2dpn5oe1hskbn1g@4ax.com>,
> Neil Maxwell <neil.maxwell@intel.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> You also need several generations of backup, and never overwrite your
> best backup. (this applies to disks and re-writable media.)

Common consens here is 3 or more independent media sets in rotation.
If you keep backups for a longer time, add media sets. And be prepared
to have to restore from the second-newest set.

> Unless you've actually tested a restore to bare iron you don't
> know if your disaster recovery plan will work when you need it.

Not a media reliability issue, but very true! I had to do this once
(it worked), and since then I try this once a year or so with a spare
disk to be sure.

> These days I do image backups to a pair of big disks in another
> computer on my LAN, (these disks are synced in case one dies) and I
> backup my data (mostly "My Documents") with some sync software that
> keeps my laptop in sync with my desktop machine.

So-so from the point of reliability. Should be o.k.. Good for
convenience.

> test test test .
And be sure what you actually test for!

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Paul J. Hurley

2005-01-15, 5:45 pm

Has anyone here tried any of the online backup solutions offered by
some ISP's? Essentially you pay a monthly fee for a block of storage
(500MB, 1GB, 2GB, 5GB, whatever) on a server located "somewhere" and
some software that runs in the background on your local machine that
uploads files after changes, compressed and encrypted of course. The
advantage is that all of this is automated and there is no additional
hardware to deal with. This can be a disadvantage as well.

Opinions?

On 14 Jan 2005 15:00:22 GMT, Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage chrisisasavage@hotmail.com wrote:

----
Paul J. Hurley
Caliban Computing
http://www.Caliban.com/
Spam resistant return email address.

Al Dykes

2005-01-15, 5:45 pm

In article <09biu0pjca4r2e3a8ntg7nkctc2ckdknah@4ax.com>,
Paul J. Hurley <hurleyp@NoSpam.caliban.com> wrote:
>Has anyone here tried any of the online backup solutions offered by
>some ISP's? Essentially you pay a monthly fee for a block of storage
>(500MB, 1GB, 2GB, 5GB, whatever) on a server located "somewhere" and
>some software that runs in the background on your local machine that
>uploads files after changes, compressed and encrypted of course. The
>advantage is that all of this is automated and there is no additional
>hardware to deal with. This can be a disadvantage as well.
>
>Opinions?

I know people that have been using ibackup.com for several years
and I can recommend it. It's great for user data,
but it doesn't replace image backups for bare iron reinstalls
unless you are just writing MSWord docs and can sit down
on any PC with an internet connection to do your work.

It's "one touch backup", at least the way my friends
use it.

The access-your-data-anywhere is a nice feature.

You can get an ISP account with 500MB or more disk space
for a few bucks a months and use FTP to upload a ZIP
file of your documents.

For a business contigency plan, I'm sure that a responsible
online backup service has a EULA that should be read that lays
out terms and liabilities.

(no financial relationship with ibackup. I just see it used
on a daily basis.)

>
>
>On 14 Jan 2005 15:00:22 GMT, Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>
>----
>Paul J. Hurley
>Caliban Computing
>http://www.Caliban.com/
>Spam resistant return email address.

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

Paul Rubin

2005-01-15, 5:45 pm

Paul J. Hurley <hurleyp@NoSpam.caliban.com> writes:
> Has anyone here tried any of the online backup solutions offered by
> some ISP's? Essentially you pay a monthly fee for a block of storage
> (500MB, 1GB, 2GB, 5GB, whatever) on a server located "somewhere" and
> some software that runs in the background on your local machine that
> uploads files after changes, compressed and encrypted of course. The
> advantage is that all of this is automated and there is no additional
> hardware to deal with. This can be a disadvantage as well.

If it's just a few MB, that might work pretty well. Transferring 5GB
over a typical broadband connection will be pretty slow. Also, I
don't know any of those services that provide encryption on the client
side by default. You have to supply your own.

Al Dykes

2005-01-15, 5:45 pm

In article <7xis5yihad.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
>Paul J. Hurley <hurleyp@NoSpam.caliban.com> writes:
>
>If it's just a few MB, that might work pretty well. Transferring 5GB
>over a typical broadband connection will be pretty slow. Also, I
>don't know any of those services that provide encryption on the client
>side by default. You have to supply your own.

The daily upload would be _really_ slow on an adsl line,
but some smart software that only sent modofied files would make
the best of things (or someting that works in background.

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

Arno Wagner

2005-01-15, 5:45 pm

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Paul J. Hurley <hurleyp@nospam.caliban.com> wrote:
> Has anyone here tried any of the online backup solutions offered by
> some ISP's? Essentially you pay a monthly fee for a block of storage
> (500MB, 1GB, 2GB, 5GB, whatever) on a server located "somewhere" and
> some software that runs in the background on your local machine that
> uploads files after changes, compressed and encrypted of course. The
> advantage is that all of this is automated and there is no additional
> hardware to deal with. This can be a disadvantage as well.

> Opinions?

It is surely a good solution for a single off-site backup if
a) confidentiallity is really ensured
b) you data volume is low

It is not a replacement for a backup with several independent media
sets, unless the online service does that type of backup on the
storage, the cycle time fits your needs _and_ they allow you access
to older backups.

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Daniel Prince

2005-01-15, 8:45 pm

Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> wrote:

>High reliability, high lifetime, medium cost, low capacity:
> - MOD (3.5"), DVD-RAM
>
>To long-term store lower volumes of critical (family photos,
>diploma thesis, etc.) data use MOD or DVD-RAM.

Is that DVD-RAM in an original unopened cartridge only or would you
include DVD-RAM without a cartridge if it is handled carefully?
--
I am TERRIBLY cruel to my cat. I tease him with a vine tendril
until he either jumps up in the air to bat at it or zooms around
in a circle until he gets too dizzy to stand up. What is cruel about
it is that I don't do it nearly as much as he wants me to.

----== Posted via webservertalk.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.webservertalk.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Daniel Prince

2005-01-15, 8:45 pm

Daniel Prince

2005-01-15, 8:45 pm

Arno Wagner

2005-01-16, 5:45 pm

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Daniel Prince <neutrino1@comcast.net> wrote:
> Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> wrote:

[vbcol=seagreen]
> Is that DVD-RAM in an original unopened cartridge only or would you
> include DVD-RAM without a cartridge if it is handled carefully?

DVD-RAM is a good solution, but not as reliable as MOD. MOD
is allways with cartridge and verify after each write.

With DVD-RAM you get either, but usually not both, i.e. cartridges
don't need to be verified by the drive and blank disks need to be but
do not have a cartridge.

Personally if the disk is handled only with gloves and stored in
a dark place, cartridge-less DVD-RAM should be o.k., but note that
they only have 100.000 certified write cycles.

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Rob Turk

2005-01-16, 5:45 pm

<chrisisasavage@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1105650059.340774.306560@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>I am looking for opinions on what a decent tape backup for a PC
> workstation might be, somewhere around 40 gigs or so, speed is not the
> biggest issue, mostly being reasonablly priced and around 40 gigs (give
> or take a few). I'm wondering what people think the better brands are
> for this type of applications, and if possible, a suggestion on a
> model.
>
> Thanks

Exabyte VXA-2 fits your bill. Pricewatch lists them for just under $800. You
can then use X10 tapes for 35GB native, and once you need them, use X23
tapes to get 80GB native.

Rob

Brian K

2005-01-16, 5:45 pm

On 01/16/2005 11:51 AM Rob Turk wrote:

><chrisisasavage@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1105650059.340774.306560@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>Exabyte VXA-2 fits your bill. Pricewatch lists them for just under $800. You
>can then use X10 tapes for 35GB native, and once you need them, use X23
>tapes to get 80GB native.
>
>Rob
>
>
>
>
Rob,

How fortunate for you that your personal finances permit you to see
"just under $800." as affordable. I am not quite sure that the OP would
agree. I certainly don't. Affordable to me is $200. and that's why I
am now looking at external HDD.

--
________
To email me, Edit "xt" from my email address.
Brian M. Kochera
"Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!"
View My Web Page: http://home.earthlink.net/~brian1951

Rob Turk

2005-01-16, 5:45 pm

"Brian K" <brianxt1951@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%XzGd.874$Rs.136@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Rob,
>
> How fortunate for you that your personal finances permit you to see "just
> under $800." as affordable. I am not quite sure that the OP would agree.
> I certainly don't. Affordable to me is $200. and that's why I am now
> looking at external HDD.

OP was asking for a tape option (See subject: Tape Backup). VXA-2 is as
affordable as it gets for a reliable tape drive in the capacity range he
asked for. $800 is a lot of money and you'll need to invest another $150 in
a set of tapes, but that buys you a lot of protection.

HDD backup isn't bad for casual safety copies of your data, but it isn't
backup. For real backup you will want to go back a number of versions
("whoops, that file got corrupted two weeks ago.."), and you want to store
at least one copy off-site. If it's just your personal MP3 collection, then
HDD is fine. If you want multiple versions of your backup then you may have
to get multiple drives. That's $200 plus another $200, plus maybe another
$200.... If you get hit by a virus while you backup drive is attached, poof
goes your backup. If you drop your harddisk, poof goes your backup. If your
house gets hit by a lightning strike, poof goes your backup. And one
arguement often overlooked, an external HDD attracts a lot of unwanted
attention from uninvited guests, poof goes your backup. Tapes on the other
hand are 'dull', unattractive and will rarely be stolen by a casual thieve.

If it's your tax administration, your current consultancy projects, your
source code, your thesis, your latest novel or your entire customer
administration then a tape drive and a decent backup strategy is money well
spent. If $800 is too much, then maybe a VXA-1 will do, or you can try to
find a deal at eBay.

Rob

Paul Rubin

2005-01-16, 5:45 pm

"Rob Turk" <_wipe_me_r.turk@chello.nl> writes:
> OP was asking for a tape option (See subject: Tape Backup). VXA-2 is as
> affordable as it gets for a reliable tape drive in the capacity range he
> asked for. $800 is a lot of money and you'll need to invest another $150 in
> a set of tapes, but that buys you a lot of protection.
>
> HDD backup isn't bad for casual safety copies of your data, but it isn't
> backup. For real backup you will want to go back a number of versions
> ("whoops, that file got corrupted two weeks ago.."), and you want to store
> at least one copy off-site. If it's just your personal MP3 collection, then
> HDD is fine. If you want multiple versions of your backup then you may have
> to get multiple drives. That's $200 plus another $200, plus maybe another
> $200....

Well, $200 gets you around 300 GB of hard disc space. VXA2 X23 tape
is $85/80GB so to back up the same amount of data on tape, you spend
over $300 just on the blank tape.

> If you get hit by a virus while you backup drive is attached, poof
> goes your backup. If you drop your harddisk, poof goes your backup. If your
> house gets hit by a lightning strike, poof goes your backup.

True, and just leaving HD's sitting around long enough often results
in them failing when you spin them up again.

> And one arguement often overlooked, an external HDD attracts a lot
> of unwanted attention from uninvited guests, poof goes your
> backup. Tapes on the other hand are 'dull', unattractive and will
> rarely be stolen by a casual thieve.

Also a good point--keep them hidden away or locked up.

> If $800 is too much, then maybe a VXA-1 will do, or you can try to
> find a deal at eBay.

Here's a new LTO-1 for $625:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...item=5156973017

If it's your tax administration, your current consultancy
projects, your source code, your thesis, your latest novel or your
entire customer administration then a tape drive and a decent
backup strategy is money well spent. If $800 is too much, then
maybe a VXA-1 will do, or you can try to find a deal at eBay.

I don't know about customer administration but the other examples
sound like such small amounts of data that you might just encrypt
them and upload them to your ISP.

J. Clarke

2005-01-17, 2:45 am

Rob Turk wrote:

> "Brian K" <brianxt1951@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:%XzGd.874$Rs.136@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> OP was asking for a tape option (See subject: Tape Backup). VXA-2 is as
> affordable as it gets for a reliable tape drive in the capacity range he
> asked for. $800 is a lot of money and you'll need to invest another $150
> in a set of tapes, but that buys you a lot of protection.
>
> HDD backup isn't bad for casual safety copies of your data, but it isn't
> backup. For real backup you will want to go back a number of versions
> ("whoops, that file got corrupted two weeks ago.."), and you want to store
> at least one copy off-site.

And disk prevents you from doing this how?

> If it's just your personal MP3 collection,
> then HDD is fine. If you want multiple versions of your backup then you
> may have to get multiple drives. That's $200 plus another $200, plus maybe
> another $200....

$200 gets you a 300 gig drive. 40 gig drives go for about 50 bucks, a
little less than a V17 tape.

> If you get hit by a virus while you backup drive is
> attached, poof goes your backup.

And how is copying infected files to a tape superior to copying them to a
disk?

> If you drop your harddisk, poof goes your
> backup.

If you drop it hard enough in its shock-mounted caddy to exceed 350 g
acceleration then "poof" goes that day's backup. If you leave the tape on
top of your car and drive off poof there goes your backup too. If you
can't afford to lose one day's backup to damaged media then you need to
pursue a parallel backup strategy.

> If your house gets hit by a lightning strike, poof goes your
> backup.

And there is something magic about tape that makes it immune to the intense
magnetic fields that go with a lightning strike? How is it that a disk,
with its much higher coercivity and its metal shell all around the media
manages to get damaged while a tape survives?

This is one reason you retain an off-site backup.

> And one arguement often overlooked, an external HDD attracts a lot
> of unwanted attention from uninvited guests, poof goes your backup. Tapes
> on the other hand are 'dull', unattractive and will rarely be stolen by a
> casual thieve.

So? This is another reason you maintain an off-site backup. In any case, a
disk in a caddy generally doesn't look too sexy either.

> If it's your tax administration, your current consultancy projects, your
> source code, your thesis, your latest novel or your entire customer
> administration then a tape drive and a decent backup strategy is money
> well spent. If $800 is too much, then maybe a VXA-1 will do, or you can
> try to find a deal at eBay.

So who is better off, the guy with an 800 buck tape drive and one tape, or
the guy with 16 disks in caddys that he's running a two-week rotation
backup on?

You seem to be assuming that someone performing disk-based backup will only
spend 40 bucks for one disk but will spend over a thousand for a tape drive
and tapes. That's not the alternative, the altnernative is to use a bunch
of 50 buck tapes and an 800 buck drive or use a bunch of 50 buck disks that
don't need a separate drive.
>
> Rob

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Paul Rubin

2005-01-17, 2:45 am

Date: 16 Jan 2005 19:13:24 -0800
Message-ID: <7x3bx07nor.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
Organization: Nightsong/Fort GNOX
Lines: 46
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
NNTP-Posting-Host: ruckus.brouhaha.com
X-Trace: news.spies.com 1105931605 64.62.206.2 (16 Jan 2005 19:13:25 -0800)
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.moat.net!newsfeed-3001.bay.webtv.net!news.spies.com!not-for-mail
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage:295537 comp.arch.storage:35567

"J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> And how is copying infected files to a tape superior to copying them to a
> disk?

I think the idea is that you could have an uninfected backup drive
attached to your PC when the virus runs, the virus can wipe out the
backup drive even though you weren't doing a backup at the time.

The solution is if you're backing up to HD's, use removable HD's and
make sure they're actually removed except when a backup is in
progress.

>
> And there is something magic about tape that makes it immune to the intense
> magnetic fields that go with a lightning strike? How is it that a disk,
> with its much higher coercivity and its metal shell all around the media
> manages to get damaged while a tape survives?

The magnetic files aren't THAT strong. Neither the disk platters nor
the tape gets erased. The lightning fries the drive electronics (disk
or tape), not the media. With a disk, once the electronics are fried,
you can't read the platters any more, without some ultra-expensive
data recovery attempt that isn't successful all that often. With
tape, you just put the tape into another drive and read it normally.

> You seem to be assuming that someone performing disk-based backup will only
> spend 40 bucks for one disk but will spend over a thousand for a tape drive
> and tapes. That's not the alternative, the altnernative is to use a bunch
> of 50 buck tapes and an 800 buck drive or use a bunch of 50 buck disks that
> don't need a separate drive.

I dunno about 50 buck discs, I think you have to spend a bit more if
you want external enclosures. If you just mean those pull-out caddy
type discs, you have to power down your PC when you install or remove
one of those things, which makes backup considerably less convenient.

Tape really does seem to be superior for backup, and VXA drives are
pretty good technology. Their main drawback is that the tapes are so
expensive. Right now I back up to HD, but am looking towards LTO.
LTO-3 has just started shipping (400 GB native!) and perhaps as a
result, there's been quite a drop in the cost of LTO-{1,2} drives and
media over the past few months.

J. Clarke

2005-01-17, 2:45 am

Paul Rubin wrote:

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> I think the idea is that you could have an uninfected backup drive
> attached to your PC when the virus runs, the virus can wipe out the
> backup drive even though you weren't doing a backup at the time.
>
> The solution is if you're backing up to HD's, use removable HD's and
> make sure they're actually removed except when a backup is in
> progress.

The thing is, if the machine is "hit by a virus" while the daily backup disk
is in the machine you lose that day's data, not the previous day's.
Assuming that the virus will actually corrupt a compressed, encrypted image
file in a nonrecoverable way.

>
> The magnetic files aren't THAT strong. Neither the disk platters nor
> the tape gets erased. The lightning fries the drive electronics (disk
> or tape), not the media. With a disk, once the electronics are fried,
> you can't read the platters any more, without some ultra-expensive
> data recovery attempt that isn't successful all that often. With
> tape, you just put the tape into another drive and read it normally.

If the contents of the platters remain undamaged then the recovery isn't
going to be all that expensive--a circuit board swap will probably do it.

>
> I dunno about 50 buck discs, I think you have to spend a bit more if
> you want external enclosures.

Why would one want "external enclosures? A Kingwin drive bay costs 25 bucks
and you pay about 14 for the trays.

> If you just mean those pull-out caddy
> type discs, you have to power down your PC

Maybe _you_ do, but I don't. Disable the drive, pull it, insert the new
one, enable it. SATA is designed to support hot-swap and it actually works
reasonably well.

> when you install or remove
> one of those things, which makes backup considerably less convenient.

> Tape really does seem to be superior for backup, and VXA drives are
> pretty good technology. Their main drawback is that the tapes are so
> expensive. Right now I back up to HD, but am looking towards LTO.
> LTO-3 has just started shipping (400 GB native!) and perhaps as a
> result, there's been quite a drop in the cost of LTO-{1,2} drives and
> media over the past few months.

Tape is cost effective for some purposes, not for others. If you need
_reliable_ backup then put two drive bays in your machine, attach them to a
RAID controller, backup to a RAID-1, then take one disk home and leave the
other at work. Do _that_ with tape for a reasonable cost--the software
alone will buy you quite a lot of disks, and you'll need two tape drives.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Rob Turk

2005-01-17, 2:45 am

"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xsm51nels.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
> "Rob Turk" <_wipe_me_r.turk@chello.nl> writes:
>
> Well, $200 gets you around 300 GB of hard disc space. VXA2 X23 tape
> is $85/80GB so to back up the same amount of data on tape, you spend
> over $300 just on the blank tape.
>
With tape you can select the capacity independent of the drive, keeping your
backups separate. OP could start with X10 media, which does exactly 40GB
native, for $32 each. See:
http://www.exabyte.com/products/tape/xtape.cfm

> I don't know about customer administration but the other examples
> sound like such small amounts of data that you might just encrypt
> them and upload them to your ISP.

I've looked into that too, one of the major stumbling blocks has been how to
get the data out if something happens to the service provider. If you get
into a dispute, they can take your data hostage. If they go belly-up or get
if they get taken over, how do you ensure you can still get your data back.
Even when you want to transfer to an ISP for better rates, how do you get
your backups out? Again, for your personal MP3 collection there's no
problem. Besides, your MP3 collection is stored onto the Internet multiple
times over already.. ;^)

If it's data that you depend your business or finances on I'd rather have
full control.

Rob

Paul Rubin

2005-01-17, 2:45 am

"J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> The thing is, if the machine is "hit by a virus" while the daily
> backup disk is in the machine you lose that day's data, not the
> previous day's. Assuming that the virus will actually corrupt a
> compressed, encrypted image file in a nonrecoverable way.

If a compressed, encrypted image is corrupted at all, it's probably
unrecoverable.

>
> If the contents of the platters remain undamaged then the recovery isn't
> going to be all that expensive--a circuit board swap will probably do it.

That's easier said than done. I won't say it never works, but all
attempts that I've heard of (not that many) to recover data by just
swapping circuit boards have failed. And the places that did it
charged a bundle.

>
> Maybe _you_ do, but I don't. Disable the drive, pull it, insert the new
> one, enable it. SATA is designed to support hot-swap and it actually works
> reasonably well.

Oh good point, I'm used to regular ATA. Hmm. I wonder if they will
start putting SATA in laptops, with an external SATA connector.

> Tape is cost effective for some purposes, not for others. If you need
> _reliable_ backup then put two drive bays in your machine, attach them to a
> RAID controller, backup to a RAID-1, then take one disk home and leave the
> other at work. Do _that_ with tape for a reasonable cost--the software
> alone will buy you quite a lot of disks, and you'll need two tape drives.

I see RAID as good for crash protection but not so good for backup.
Right now as mentioned, I'm using HD's for backup but I'm not
impressed with their reliability. I'm hoping to move up to a tape
drive again sooner or later (my old DDS-2 drive's 4GB capacity is
pathetic by today's standards). I only use free software, so that's
not a significant cost component.

Paul Rubin

2005-01-17, 2:45 am

"Rob Turk" <_wipe_me_r.turk@chello.nl> writes:
>
> I've looked into that too, one of the major stumbling blocks has been how to
> get the data out if something happens to the service provider. If you get
> into a dispute, they can take your data hostage. If they go belly-up or get
> if they get taken over, how do you ensure you can still get your data back.

We were talking about stuff like drafts of a novel, which is just a
few MB. It's simple enough to put it in several places. I've also
had ISP's go belly-up several times; some scrambling resulted each
time but there was never a serious problem getting the data out. (In
one case we hired one of the belly-up ISP's suddenly-out-of-work
employees and they let him continue having access to the data center
so he could get our stuff out).

> Even when you want to transfer to an ISP for better rates, how do you get
> your backups out?

Download it, just like you uploaded it.

> Again, for your personal MP3 collection there's no
> problem. Besides, your MP3 collection is stored onto the Internet multiple
> times over already.. ;^)

Heh, yes, an MP3 collection would be too large for this approach though.

> If it's data that you depend your business or finances on I'd rather have
> full control.

There's no such thing as full control, as the recent earthquake and
tsunamis in Asia recently illustrated for those of us who forget that
sometimes.

Maxim S. Shatskih

2005-01-17, 7:45 am

> Oh good point, I'm used to regular ATA. Hmm. I wonder if they will
> start putting SATA in laptops, with an external SATA connector.

For now, there is 1394 instead (BTW - 1394 was once positioned instead of
SATA).
The 1394-to-ATA external box is not this expensive.

--
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com

Al Dykes

2005-01-17, 7:45 am

In article <41eb5db6$0$52408$e4fe514c@dreader11.news.xs4all.nl>,
Rob Turk <_wipe_me_r.turk@chello.nl> wrote:
>"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
>news:7xsm51nels.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
>With tape you can select the capacity independent of the drive, keeping your
>backups separate. OP could start with X10 media, which does exactly 40GB
>native, for $32 each. See:
>http://www.exabyte.com/products/tape/xtape.cfm
>
>
>I've looked into that too, one of the major stumbling blocks has been how to
>get the data out if something happens to the service provider. If you get
>into a dispute, they can take your data hostage. If they go belly-up or get
>if they get taken over, how do you ensure you can still get your data back.
>Even when you want to transfer to an ISP for better rates, how do you get
>your backups out? Again, for your personal MP3 collection there's no
>problem. Besides, your MP3 collection is stored onto the Internet multiple
>times over already.. ;^)
>
>If it's data that you depend your business or finances on I'd rather have
>full control.
>
>Rob
>
>

I like iBackup, and online services of their type, if my space
requirement fit their service, and my network bandwidth. For hime use
upostream bandwidth is frequently the bottleneck. The big plus is
instant access to data from an alternate location.

I've done busness continuity planning for Big Companies for years.
Businesses use extenal services with the potential to break the
company all the time. Contracts and escrow, etc apply, Online data
backup is no different. A business person knows that everything has
risk and the good ones know how to balance risk and gain. Any online
service that sells to businesses will have a service agreement that
addresses for privacy, accessability, etc, with non-perormance
clauses. I (as a businessman) can accept, reject, or try to customize
the contract.

Backup is part of business contingency planning and it's the job of
the Sysadmin to accuratly lay out the technical costs and risks of
various backup strategies to Sr. Management, who are the proper people
to decide how much to spend for what degree of risk. Risk is never zero.

Back to the OP's requirements, I haven't seen him state how much data
he wants to back up. If it fits on a CD, burning a daily CD (read
verified) is a pretty cheap way to do backups. I don't trust CD/DVD
media but proper practices can offset their weaknesses.

CDs are good. DLT and other enterprise tape drives are good (and
noseblead expensive) The problem in in the middle size requirement.

I backup my workstations and laptops via disk-to-disk image and
image-incremental backups to a big drive on a server, keeping multiple
generations of backup on the disk. These images are migrated to a
second disk, just in case. This disk could be in a second server
but I have not done that yet. This is for my home LAN.

In addition to image backups, I sync My Documents between a desktop
system and my laptop, sometimes several times a day. That way, if I'm
working on a deadline and my system craps out my MTTR is nearly zero,
at last as for as getting my critical work done.

I also burn important work product into a couple CDs and take them
offsite.

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

Al Dykes

2005-01-17, 7:45 am

In article <csg9k4$2r5n$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru>,
Maxim S. Shatskih <maxim@storagecraft.com> wrote:
>
>For now, there is 1394 instead (BTW - 1394 was once positioned instead of
>SATA).
>The 1394-to-ATA external box is not this expensive.
>
>--
>Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
>StorageCraft Corporation
>maxim@storagecraft.com
>http://www.storagecraft.com
>
>

There is a PCMCIA SATA adapter. It's possible I read it in a review in
Tom'shardware in a review of SATA external exclosures.

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

J. Clarke

2005-01-17, 5:45 pm

Maxim S. Shatskih wrote:

>
> For now, there is 1394 instead (BTW - 1394 was once positioned instead of
> SATA).
> The 1394-to-ATA external box is not this expensive.

No, but unless there's been a radical improvement in 1394-to-ATA bridge
chips since the last time I checked the performance is abysmal. Read that
twice before you start quoting me textbook figures about 1394--it could
have an infinite transfer rate and with a lousy bridge chip it would still
give poor performance in this application.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke

2005-01-17, 5:45 pm

Paul Rubin wrote:

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> If a compressed, encrypted image is corrupted at all, it's probably
> unrecoverable.

But will a virus typically attack any file that is not executable? While
some do, is that the normal action?

>
> That's easier said than done. I won't say it never works, but all
> attempts that I've heard of (not that many) to recover data by just
> swapping circuit boards have failed. And the places that did it
> charged a bundle.

It's actually quite easily done. You pull the board off of your off-site
drive and put it on the dead drive, which generally involves about ten
minutes with a screwdriver.

Generally such an attempt is tried on a drive that is dead of undetermined
causes, not one on which the problem is known to be fried electronics. But
in the real world one would not try to fix that drive anymore than one
would try to fix a tape cartridge that got dropped and cracked. It's a
disposable device and you go to the previous day's backup.

The thing is, for any kind of backup system you can make up a scenario in
which it will fail. The question is how likely is that scenario and will
you care about your backups if it occurs.

>
> Oh good point, I'm used to regular ATA. Hmm. I wonder if they will
> start putting SATA in laptops, with an external SATA connector.

Easily done--SATA PCCard adapters go for about 20 bucks. I have a couple of
250 gig disks in external enclosures that I carry to client sites to back
up their disks when I'm going to do something that puts their data at risk
or am going to swap out a drive--I run them in RAID-1 so that if I manage
to destroy one I haven't lost their data.

>
> I see RAID as good for crash protection but not so good for backup.

Read what I wrote again. I didn't say "use RAID for backup". I said backup
_to_ the RAID. The step I assumed was obvious was to "then pull both
drives, replace them with the next day's backup set, take one home, leave
the other in the safe".

There is software that does this with tapes. You need two tape drives and
the last time I checked the price the software was a thousand dollar add-in
to a several thousand dollar enterprise backup package. There's a
crossover point on very large systems where a tape library becomes cost
effective. For home use the cost of reliable tape is prohibitive.

> Right now as mentioned, I'm using HD's for backup but I'm not
> impressed with their reliability.

Are you using just one disk or are you using a set of them in a rotation
backup like you would with tapes?

> I'm hoping to move up to a tape
> drive again sooner or later (my old DDS-2 drive's 4GB capacity is
> pathetic by today's standards). I only use free software, so that's
> not a significant cost component.

I have a number of tape drives. The trouble with them is that disk capacity
is increasing faster than tape capacity, and you need a state of the art
tape to back up a cheap disk.

And quite honestly, I'd trust disk over DDS. I've had DDS drives eat
multiple tapes.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke

2005-01-17, 5:45 pm

Rob Turk wrote:

> "Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
> news:7xsm51nels.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
> With tape you can select the capacity independent of the drive, keeping
> your backups separate. OP could start with X10 media, which does exactly
> 40GB native, for $32 each. See:
> http://www.exabyte.com/products/tape/xtape.cfm

X10 does 40 native on a VXA-2 drive, the cheapest of which bought new goes
for 810 bucks. Doesn't work at all on a VXA-1. The best price I see on
the tapes is 23 bucks. 40 gig SATA disks in shock-mounted removable
drawers go for $64, and the tray to put it in goes for $25. So let's see
how many generations of backup we can maintain for a given dollar figure.
Just for hohos let's see what it looks like for 80 gig ($67), too, which is
as large as VXA2 ($62 for X23) goes.

Cost VXA Disk VXA Disk
X10 40 X23 80

89 0 1 0 0
153 0 2 0 1
217 0 3 0 2
281 0 4 0 3
345 0 5 0 4
409 0 6 0 5
473 0 7 0 6
537 0 8 0 7
601 0 9 0 8
665 0 10 0 9
729 0 11 0 10
793 0 12 0 11
857 2 13 0 12
921 4 14 1 13
985 7 15 2 14
1049 10 16 3 15
1113 13 17 4 16
1177 15 18 5 17
1241 18 19 6 18
1305 21 20 7 19

So until you're up to 20 generations of backup the VXA costs more than disk.
With 80 gig disk vs VXA, I'm not going to show the whole table, but the
crossover occurs at 153 generations of backup. For 120 GB you'd have to
use an X10 and an X23 for $90 vs disk in drawer for 89 and VXA _never_
breaks even, not to mention having to change media in mid stream.

>
> I've looked into that too, one of the major stumbling blocks has been how
> to get the data out if something happens to the service provider. If you
> get into a dispute, they can take your data hostage.

They can take your data hostage only if you have managed to lose it while
the dispute is going on. Seems to me that if a dispute is starting the
thing to do is go to an alternative backup strategy.

> If they go belly-up
> or get if they get taken over, how do you ensure you can still get your
> data back. Even when you want to transfer to an ISP for better rates, how
> do you get your backups out?

Why do you want to "get your backups out"? Backups are, by their very
nature, disposable. Perhaps you are confusing "archives" with "backups"?
A backup exists so that you can recover when your system fails or suffers
data loss for some other reason. All the data in a backup is online on
your system except possibly for unintentionally deleted files, which on any
decent server you can recover for quite some time even without backups. If
someone steals your backups or destroys them or anything else happens to
them, you just start a new set. Losing backups is a big deal only to the
extent that someone might obtain confidential information from them and to
the extent that there is a _tiny_ risk that your system will fail in the
interval between loss of the old backups and start of the new set.

If you _care_ about the content of it beyond that it accurately reflect the
state of your system on the day it was made, if it's not disposable, then
it's not a backup, it's an archive, and the considerations for an archive
are very different from those for a backup.

> Again, for your personal MP3 collection
> there's no problem. Besides, your MP3 collection is stored onto the
> Internet multiple times over already.. ;^)

How about the video of my kid's first birthday?

> If it's data that you depend your business or finances on I'd rather have
> full control.

>
> Rob

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke

2005-01-17, 5:45 pm

Paul Rubin wrote:

> "Rob Turk" <_wipe_me_r.turk@chello.nl> writes:
>
> We were talking about stuff like drafts of a novel, which is just a
> few MB. It's simple enough to put it in several places. I've also
> had ISP's go belly-up several times; some scrambling resulted each
> time but there was never a serious problem getting the data out. (In
> one case we hired one of the belly-up ISP's suddenly-out-of-work
> employees and they let him continue having access to the data center
> so he could get our stuff out).
>
>
> Download it, just like you uploaded it.
>
>
> Heh, yes, an MP3 collection would be too large for this approach though.
>
>
> There's no such thing as full control, as the recent earthquake and
> tsunamis in Asia recently illustrated for those of us who forget that
> sometimes.

Anyone who thinks that there is "full control" should visit a museum which
has a full scale T-rex skeleton on display and consider what happened to
them.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke

2005-01-17, 5:45 pm

Al Dykes wrote:

> In article <csg9k4$2r5n$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru>,
> Maxim S. Shatskih <maxim@storagecraft.com> wrote:
>
>
> There is a PCMCIA SATA adapter. It's possible I read it in a review in
> Tom'shardware in a review of SATA external exclosures.

Actually there are several available. Newegg carries three, and froogle has
70 hits including at least one brand that newegg doesn't carry.

I have a Buslink, which is basically just a Silicon Image chip on a board in
a case and seems to run on the Silicon Image reference drivers. So far it
works fine.

They're quite remarkably cheap.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Neil Maxwell

2005-01-17, 5:45 pm

On 14 Jan 2005 10:37:31 -0800, Paul Rubin
<http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:

>Neil Maxwell <neil.maxwell@intel.com> writes:
>
>High quality CDR (e.g. Mitsui Archive Gold) have undergone a lot of
>testing and seem to be quite stable for long periods. The jury is
>still out for DVDR. Hard drives contain all kinds of seals, filters,
>lubricants on mechanical parts, and flash memory parameters and
>firmware dependent on floating charges, all of which can decay over a
>period of years. Hard drives are quite unreliable for long term
>storage.

Sorry, I've got a bunch of Mitsui and Kodak Gold and Silver from a few
years back that are nearly dead. I can't read them on most of my
readers and burners (multiple Plextors, NECs, Teacs, no-names), but my
Lite-on LTD163 will pull data that other drives give up on.

The only reliably readable disks I have from the past 6-7 years are
TY, and I've only been using them extensively for a couple of years,
so the data's not solid on them yet.

YMMV, as always.

--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer

Paul Rubin

2005-01-18, 5:45 pm

"J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> But will a virus typically attack any file that is not executable? While
> some do, is that the normal action?

The virus might simply try to reformat a hard disk, or scribble on it
at random places. With an uncompressed disk there's some chance of
recovery; with compressed, encrypted disk, it's more likely hopeless.

> It's actually quite easily done. You pull the board off of your off-site
> drive and put it on the dead drive, which generally involves about ten
> minutes with a screwdriver.

That's the easy part. The hard part is getting your data back after
you do the board swap. All I can say is, the attempts I've personally
had any contact with have been both expensive and ultimately
unsuccessful. But that's not all that many.

>
> Easily done--SATA PCCard adapters go for about 20 bucks.

Then you have to go through the PC card interface which is slower than
a disk interface, if my experience with an Adaptec 1480 scsi adapter
is any indication.

> Read what I wrote again. I didn't say "use RAID for backup". I said backup
> _to_ the RAID. The step I assumed was obvious was to "then pull both
> drives, replace them with the next day's backup set, take one home, leave
> the other in the safe".
>
> There is software that does this with tapes. You need two tape drives and
> the last time I checked the price the software was a thousand dollar add-in
> to a several thousand dollar enterprise backup package.

The equivalent with tape would be to just write two backups, or even
write one backup to two tape drives. That doesn't sound like it needs
a multi-kilobuck software package.

> There's a crossover point on very large systems where a tape library
> becomes cost effective. For home use the cost of reliable tape is
> prohibitive.

Well, if you really want to use two tape drives, that doubles the
cost, but you can get an LTO1 drive for about $600 now, so two of them
cost about what I paid for my home DDS2 drive in the mid 90's. I'd
say the cost is steep for a typical home user but I'd stop short of
"prohibitive".

>
> Are you using just one disk or are you using a set of them in a rotation
> backup like you would with tapes?

I'm using them more like archival tapes, i.e. write-once, no rotation.

> I have a number of tape drives. The trouble with them is that disk
> capacity is increasing faster than tape capacity, and you need a
> state of the art tape to back up a cheap disk.

That describes the situation really well. Right now, disk capacity
increase seems to have stalled, while tape is making some significant
advances, so for the first time in a while, high-end tape cartridges
hold more than a high-end disk drive's worth of data. I don't know if
that will last, and those tape systems really are too expensive for
home use (LTO3, SAIT).

> And quite honestly, I'd trust disk over DDS. I've had DDS drives eat
> multiple tapes.

I think a DDS backup might be more likely to fail at the moment that
it's made and there's always a chance of a drive eating a tape. I
haven't (yet) had bad experiences with tapes going south while sitting
on a shelf, which I've had with disk drives more than once.

On my infinite to-do list is to write some backup software that
uses a RAID-like strategy so if your backup needs, say, 5 tapes,
you can instead write it on (say) 8 tapes, and then if any three
of them get trashed you can still restore from the remaining 5.

J. Clarke

2005-01-18, 8:49 pm

Paul Rubin wrote:

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> The virus might simply try to reformat a hard disk, or scribble on it
> at random places. With an uncompressed disk there's some chance of
> recovery; with compressed, encrypted disk, it's more likely hopeless.

Compressed, encrypted file on a disk. Not a compressed, encrypted disk.

>
> That's the easy part. The hard part is getting your data back after
> you do the board swap. All I can say is, the attempts I've personally
> had any contact with have been both expensive and ultimately
> unsuccessful. But that's not all that many.
>
>
> Then you have to go through the PC card interface which is slower than
> a disk interface, if my experience with an Adaptec 1480 scsi adapter
> is any indication.

Cardbus is 32 bit 33MHz, just like PCI. And even if it is slower than the
disk interface, no disk on the market can fill even a 100 MB/sec pipe.

>
> The equivalent with tape would be to just write two backups, or even
> write one backup to two tape drives. That doesn't sound like it needs
> a multi-kilobuck software package.

If you write two backups then it takes twice as long and since tape is slow
anyway . . .

Now, actually backup to two tapes simultaneously and tell me how you did it
that didn't cost kilobucks.

>
> Well, if you really want to use two tape drives, that doubles the
> cost, but you can get an LTO1 drive for about $600 now, so two of them
> cost about what I paid for my home DDS2 drive in the mid 90's. I'd
> say the cost is steep for a typical home user but I'd stop short of
> "prohibitive".

Where can you get an LTO1 drive for $600 with any kind of reasonable
expectation that it's not busted or stolen?

And no, I don't want to use two tape drives, I want to have backup. I'm not
wedded to one technology like you seem to be. But you've pointed out that
if you do want to have redundant backup with tape you pay twice for the
drives or take twice as long for the backup.

>
> I'm using them more like archival tapes, i.e. write-once, no rotation.

That's not backup, that's archiving.

>
> That describes the situation really well. Right now, disk capacity
> increase seems to have stalled,

It has? 400 gig disks just started shipping for 400 bucks. Where can I get
a 400 gig tape for 400 bucks?

> while tape is making some significant
> advances, so for the first time in a while, high-end tape cartridges
> hold more than a high-end disk drive's worth of data.

They may hold more than a "high-end disk drive" if by that you mean an
enterprise SCSI drive, but they don't hold more than a big consumer disk
drive.

> I don't know if
> that will last, and those tape systems really are too expensive for
> home use (LTO3, SAIT).
>
>
> I think a DDS backup might be more likely to fail at the moment that
> it's made and there's always a chance of a drive eating a tape. I
> haven't (yet) had bad experiences with tapes going south while sitting
> on a shelf, which I've had with disk drives more than once.
>
> On my infinite to-do list is to write some backup software that
> uses a RAID-like strategy so if your backup needs, say, 5 tapes,
> you can instead write it on (say) 8 tapes, and then if any three
> of them get trashed you can still restore from the remaining 5.

That's commercially available from several vendors.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Paul Rubin

2005-01-18, 8:49 pm

"J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> Compressed, encrypted file on a disk. Not a compressed, encrypted disk.

OK, that too. Actually maybe even worse, depending on the type of
encryption and authentication. Change one bit and the whole file is
potentially turned into garbage.

>
> Cardbus is 32 bit 33MHz, just like PCI. And even if it is slower than the
> disk interface, no disk on the market can fill even a 100 MB/sec pipe.

Yes, however, I've gotten crap performance through that Cardbus 1480
card. Maybe something else was wrong that I didn't try to pursue.
Have you actually measured performance of external discs through PC
card SATA?

> If you write two backups then it takes twice as long and since tape is slow
> anyway . . .

Eh? The problem with tape that I'm facing is that it's too fast, not
too slow. LTO1 has around 15MB native transfer speed which a PC disk
system -might- be able to keep up with. LTO2 is around 30MB/sec which
is hard to keep fed. LTO3 ($$$) is almost 70MB/sec. I just don't see
how to back up to LTO3 at full speed from any type of PC.
(Figures from http://www.span.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_45).

> Now, actually backup to two tapes simultaneously and tell me how you
> did it that didn't cost kilobucks.

I think the bottleneck would be hardware transfer speeds, not software.

> Where can you get an LTO1 drive for $600 with any kind of reasonable
> expectation that it's not busted or stolen?

There were several new units on ebay for around that price last week.
LTO1/LTO2 have gotten cheaper since LTO3 started shipping recently.

>
> It has? 400 gig disks just started shipping for 400 bucks. Where can I get
> a 400 gig tape for 400 bucks?

http://www.tape4backup.com/newlookltobrand.html
Scroll down to the LTO3 selection.

>
> They may hold more than a "high-end disk drive" if by that you mean an
> enterprise SCSI drive, but they don't hold more than a big consumer disk
> drive.

LTO3 holds 400GB and SAIT-1 holds 500GB. SAIT-2 (scheduled for next
year) is supposed to hold 1000GB and there are no disk drives with
that capacity expected by then.

>
> That's commercially available from several vendors.

I only use free software, but it's possible that there's some already
available.

J. Clarke

2005-01-19, 2:45 am

Paul Rubin wrote:

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> OK, that too. Actually maybe even worse, depending on the type of
> encryption and authentication. Change one bit and the whole file is
> potentially turned into garbage.
>
>
> Yes, however, I've gotten crap performance through that Cardbus 1480
> card. Maybe something else was wrong that I didn't try to pursue.
> Have you actually measured performance of external discs through PC
> card SATA?

Haven't measured, but was able to copy 35 gig in about a half an hour using
LiveState Recovery.

>
> Eh? The problem with tape that I'm facing is that it's too fast, not
> too slow. LTO1 has around 15MB native transfer speed which a PC disk
> system -might- be able to keep up with. LTO2 is around 30MB/sec which
> is hard to keep fed. LTO3 ($$$) is almost 70MB/sec. I just don't see
> how to back up to LTO3 at full speed from any type of PC.

RAID.

> (Figures from http://www.span.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_45).

Believe it when you see it. The performance of _anything_ is inflated in
the advertising.

>
> I think the bottleneck would be hardware transfer speeds, not software.

Regardless of where the bottleneck is you need to have software which will
write the same data to two tapes simultaneously in order to backup to two
drives simultaneously.

>
> There were several new units on ebay for around that price last week.

Is that the price they finally went for or the starting price? Lowest ebay
price I've seen is a bit less than the lowest Froogle price but that
auction still had some time to go. And they're still in the $800 range.

> LTO1/LTO2 have gotten cheaper since LTO3 started shipping recently.
>
>
> http://www.tape4backup.com/newlookltobrand.html
> Scroll down to the LTO3 selection.

And what am I supposed to see there? I'm sorry, but a $130 cartridge and a
$5000 tape drive is not 400 gig for 400 bucks, it's 400 gig for 5130 bucks.

>
> LTO3 holds 400GB and SAIT-1 holds 500GB. SAIT-2 (scheduled for next
> year) is supposed to hold 1000GB and there are no disk drives with
> that capacity expected by then.

What's expected and what happens are two different things. Regardless,
that's a $6K drive and if the only vendor is Sony then I'd rather trust my
data to a shredder thank you.

>
> I only use free software, but it's possible that there's some already
> available.

So far you have convinced me of nothing. Perhaps if you weren't buying
$6000 tape drives you could afford some software.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Paul Rubin

2005-01-19, 2:45 am

"J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> Regardless of where the bottleneck is you need to have software which will
> write the same data to two tapes simultaneously in order to backup to two
> drives simultaneously.

I just don't see any multi-kilobucks of software needed for that. I
could probably hack up GNU Tar to do it pretty straightforwardly.

>
> Is that the price they finally went for or the starting price? Lowest ebay
> price I've seen is a bit less than the lowest Froogle price but that
> auction still had some time to go. And they're still in the $800 range.

There were a few at $600 or so if you clicked "Buy It Now". Someone
may have snagged them all. I was surprised they were that low and
even $800 is pretty good. Just a few months ago I'd been seeing them
in the $1300 range but now you can get brand new Certance LTO2 drives
for $1700-ish from dealers.

> And what am I supposed to see there? I'm sorry, but a $130 cartridge and a
> $5000 tape drive is not 400 gig for 400 bucks, it's 400 gig for 5130 bucks.

We were discussing the media cost. Yes, the tape drive adds a lot.
LTO3 is way out of my price range for example. LTO2 is more than I
want to spend but not outside the realm of possibility if I can think
of a use for that much capacity. LTO1 even at $800 looks pretty
attractive, a much more serious medium than using a bunch of those
consumer hard drives.

>
> So far you have convinced me of nothing. Perhaps if you weren't buying
> $6000 tape drives you could afford some software.

There's absolutely no way I'm going to trust backups or security
(encryption) to software (or at least data layouts) that I don't have
source for and hasn't been publicly reviewed. I won't have my data
hostage to some software company. No amount of money in the world
(well...) could get me to run non-free software for stuff like this.

Al Dykes

2005-01-19, 5:46 pm

In article <7x8y6poq15.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
>"J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
>I just don't see any multi-kilobucks of software needed for that. I
>could probably hack up GNU Tar to do it pretty straightforwardly.
>
>
>There were a few at $600 or so if you clicked "Buy It Now". Someone
>may have snagged them all. I was surprised they were that low and
>even $800 is pretty good. Just a few months ago I'd been seeing them
>in the $1300 range but now you can get brand new Certance LTO2 drives
>for $1700-ish from dealers.
>
>
>We were discussing the media cost. Yes, the tape drive adds a lot.
>LTO3 is way out of my price range for example. LTO2 is more than I
>want to spend but not outside the realm of possibility if I can think
>of a use for that much capacity. LTO1 even at $800 looks pretty
>attractive, a much more serious medium than using a bunch of those
>consumer hard drives.
>

I've bought a couple hundered LT IV carts on ebay, a few at a time and
saved the little company I worked for at least 50% of street price.
At some point I realized that the name brand tapes (mostly FUJI) had a
lifetime no-questions-asked replacement warranty. That made buying
tapes a no-brainer, since I could even buy a broken tape and
eventually get a new tape for it. I also had Veritas backup software
that reported tape soft error rates, so I could see weak tapes
and cycle them out of the heavy rotations.

I use ebauy to by tapes that are listed as being unopened,
without hesitation.

OT: I forget how much data teh OP backs up. I'd look at DLT IV tape
(35GB/70 compressed) would be cheaper for the OP. Lots of drives and
tapes on Ebay.

DLT is so heavily used in business that you'll be able to get tapes,
and drives for a years, and 50 years from now I bet there will be some
data conversion companies that will read your tape if you should need
it.

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

J. Clarke

2005-01-19, 5:46 pm

Paul Rubin wrote:

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
> I just don't see any multi-kilobucks of software needed for that. I
> could probably hack up GNU Tar to do it pretty straightforwardly.

Now use that to back up a Windows box.

>
> There were a few at $600 or so if you clicked "Buy It Now". Someone
> may have snagged them all. I was surprised they were that low and
> even $800 is pretty good. Just a few months ago I'd been seeing them
> in the $1300 range but now you can get brand new Certance LTO2 drives
> for $1700-ish from dealers.
>
>
> We were discussing the media cost.

Perhaps you were discussing the media cost. I was discussion the cost of
obtaining a backup. The media does you no good at all without the drive.

> Yes, the tape drive adds a lot.
> LTO3 is way out of my price range for example. LTO2 is more than I
> want to spend but not outside the realm of possibility if I can think
> of a use for that much capacity. LTO1 even at $800 looks pretty
> attractive, a much more serious medium than using a bunch of those
> consumer hard drives.

It may be a more "serious" medium, but does it really confer any advantage
when used as a backup device? Not an archiving device, a _backup_ device?

>
> There's absolutely no way I'm going to trust backups or security
> (encryption) to software (or at least data layouts) that I don't have
> source for and hasn't been publicly reviewed. I won't have my data
> hostage to some software company. No amount of money in the world
> (well...) could get me to run non-free software for stuff like this.

Suit yourself. Personally I've got better uses for 6 grand than backing up
my video collection.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke

2005-01-19, 5:46 pm

Al Dykes wrote:

> In article <7x8y6poq15.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
> Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
>
> I've bought a couple hundered LT IV carts on ebay, a few at a time and
> saved the little company I worked for at least 50% of street price.
> At some point I realized that the name brand tapes (mostly FUJI) had a
> lifetime no-questions-asked replacement warranty. That made buying
> tapes a no-brainer, since I could even buy a broken tape and
> eventually get a new tape for it. I also had Veritas backup software
> that reported tape soft error rates, so I could see weak tapes
> and cycle them out of the heavy rotations.
>
> I use ebauy to by tapes that are listed as being unopened,
> without hesitation.
>
> OT: I forget how much data teh OP backs up. I'd look at DLT IV tape
> (35GB/70 compressed) would be cheaper for the OP. Lots of drives and
> tapes on Ebay.
>
> DLT is so heavily used in business that you'll be able to get tapes,
> and drives for a years, and 50 years from now I bet there will be some
> data conversion companies that will read your tape if you should need
> it.

Why would one want to read a 50 year old backup? Or are you confusing
"archive" and "backup"?

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

David Magda

2005-01-20, 5:46 pm

Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> writes:

> If you don't drop or overheat them, HDD reliability if fine for
> regular backups. (Backup != long-term storage.)

We recently got a new array with ATA disks which is relatively
'cheap'. We're planning on doing a backup to disk, and then make
copies of the backup images to tape (one tape onsite, another tape
offsite).

Our backups will be faster, but we'll also have stuff 'offline' in
case the disks get fried.

> I agree that DVD+/-R(W) is unclear at the moment. However the
> German computer magazine c't does regular tests of burner/medium
> combinations and has burned disks evaluated with professional

It's also harder to automate if media is too smal. And if it's not
automated, it's less likely to get done.

--
David Magda <dmagda at ee.ryerson.ca>, http://www.magda.ca/
Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under
the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well
under the new. -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _The Prince_, Chapter VI

David Magda

2005-01-20, 5:46 pm

Paul J. Hurley <hurleyp@NoSpam.caliban.com> writes:

> Has anyone here tried any of the online backup solutions offered by
> some ISP's? Essentially you pay a monthly fee for a block of
> storage (500MB, 1GB, 2GB, 5GB, whatever) on a server located

Can't this be done with any type of web account? Simply FTP the files
over. Heck, under Linux you can treat your Gmail account as a file
system.

--
David Magda <dmagda at ee.ryerson.ca>, http://www.magda.ca/
Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under
the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well
under the new. -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _The Prince_, Chapter VI

David Magda

2005-01-20, 5:46 pm

adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) writes:

> The daily upload would be _really_ slow on an adsl line, but some
> smart software that only sent modofied files would make the best of
> things (or someting that works in background.

Rsync? Or the multiplatform Unison (not the Usenet reader).

--
David Magda <dmagda at ee.ryerson.ca>, http://www.magda.ca/
Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under
the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well
under the new. -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _The Prince_, Chapter VI

David Magda

2005-01-20, 5:46 pm

Brian K <brianxt1951@earthlink.net> writes:

> How fortunate for you that your personal finances permit you to see
> "just under $800." as affordable. I am not quite sure that the OP
> would agree. I certainly don't. Affordable to me is $200. and
> that's why I am now looking at external HDD.

And how much is recreating all the data you lost worth to you?

--
David Magda <dmagda at ee.ryerson.ca>, http://www.magda.ca/
Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under
the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well
under the new. -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _The Prince_, Chapter VI

J. Clarke

2005-01-20, 5:46 pm

David Magda wrote:

> Brian K <brianxt1951@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>
> And how much is recreating all the data you lost worth to you?

If he's a typical home user then "recreating all the data you lost" counts
as either recreation or good riddance, depending on whether it was his or
his kid's MP3 collection that went.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Arno Wagner

2005-01-20, 5:46 pm

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David Magda <dmagda+trace050112@ee.ryerson.ca> wrote:
> Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> writes:

[vbcol=seagreen]
> We recently got a new array with ATA disks which is relatively
> 'cheap'. We're planning on doing a backup to disk, and then make
> copies of the backup images to tape (one tape onsite, another tape
> offsite).

> Our backups will be faster, but we'll also have stuff 'offline' in
> case the disks get fried.

Good idea. This is really just "persistent buffering", a quite old
technology, e.g. implemented in many tape-library storage systems.

But please use at least 3 independent sets of tapes with this too
and verify the readability of your tapes at regular intervals.

[vbcol=seagreen]
> It's also harder to automate if media is too smal. And if it's not
> automated, it's less likely to get done.

Also a very good point.

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Arno Wagner

2005-01-20, 5:46 pm

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David Magda <dmagda+trace050112@ee.ryerson.ca> wrote:
> Paul J. Hurley <hurleyp@NoSpam.caliban.com> writes:

[vbcol=seagreen]
> Can't this be done with any type of web account? Simply FTP the files
> over. Heck, under Linux you can treat your Gmail account as a file
> system.

Yes, that is one really cool application! I guess Google did not
quite antocipate that ;-)

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Richard Tobin

2005-01-20, 8:45 pm

In article <86wtu8vyd0.fsf@number6.magda.ca>,
David Magda <dmagda+trace050112@ee.ryerson.ca> wrote:

>And how much is recreating all the data you lost worth to you?

That's not a realistic question for most people in their private
lives. I know many people who would spend hours fixing something
rather than paying someone 30 pounds to do it, but would not consider
doing the work for someone else for, say, 100 pounds.

For most people, time spent outside their job and money are just not
interconvertible.

-- Richard

David Magda

2005-02-04, 5:46 pm

Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> writes:

> Good idea. This is really just "persistent buffering", a quite old
> technology, e.g. implemented in many tape-library storage systems.
>
> But please use at least 3 independent sets of tapes with this too
> and verify the readability of your tapes at regular intervals.

Any reason why three should be used?

--
David Magda <dmagda at ee.ryerson.ca>, http://www.magda.ca/
Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under
the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well
under the new. -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _The Prince_, Chapter VI

Arno Wagner

2005-02-04, 8:45 pm

In comp.sys.