[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/16/2007
12:59:50 PM:
> Timothy J. Massey wrote:
>
> >> Won't the frequent reformatting et al. wear out your hard drives
> >> pretty fast?
> >
> > How is a couple of formats going to wear out a drive? I did not go
> > into
> > further detail, but now I will:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > There were *so* many more problems in the article you linked than the
> > fact the drive had to rebuild daily: the fact that a desktop hard
> > drive
> > died after working for *years* in very high temperatures doesn't sound
> > very unreasonable, does it? The fact that someone depended upon
> > *that*
> > for their data storage is the problem, not the fact that the drive had
> > to spend an hour or two a day copying itself, in a nice, linear
> > non-seeking way. It's not like the drive would have stopped spinning
> > during that time...
>
> I'm sorry, reading this it feels like you think I was attacking you
> or your methods. I wasn't really, I was genuinely wondering. And
> well, it was just that I read that extreme story on TheDailyWTF the
> day before that made me think about it. And yes, I was thinking about
> low-level formats, but you're obviously not doing those every day.
I'm sorry if I was snippy. I saw *very* little in common between the
link you sent and the solution that I've implemented. Other than the
fact that they both involved hard drives... :)
Frankly, I do *not* like my solution. I think it has a number of downsides:
* My archives have no history associated with them
* I lose any kind of pooling in my archives
* It's an extra step to get the archives in the first place, and extra
steps are extra places to fail
* My archives are encapsulated into a single large file that I then
have to unpack somewhere
* For now, my archive jobs are not integrated into the BackupPC GUI
and all kinds of other issues. However, it's kind of like Winston
Churchill's quote on democracy: it's the worst choice, except for all
the others...
Fortunately, the only time these limitations come into play is in the
event of total disaster: if both the e.g. file server *and* the backup
server are unrecoverable. Unfortunately, if I'm ever actually in that
situation, it's the time I want the *least* hassle with my backup! :)
So, again: I am *very* open to criticism, if you can suggest something
better! I've mentioned the break-RAID-1-array solution. I understand
the rationale, but I've decided that this is preferable. Are there any
other solutions out there?
Or are you all going without off-site backup? :)
Tim Massey
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
