On 2022-11-10 at 09:06, Dan Ritter wrote:

> Now, RAID is not a backup because it is a single store of data: if
> you delete something from it, it is deleted. If you suffer a
> lightning strike to the server, there's no recovery from molten
> metal.

Here's where I find disagreement.

Say you didn't use RAID, and you had two disks in the same machine.

In order to avoid data loss in the event that one of the disks failed,
you engaged in a practice of copying all files from one disk onto the other.

That process could, and would, easily be referred to as backing up the
files. It's not a very distant backup, and it wouldn't protect against
that lightning strike, but it's still a separate backed-up copy.

But copying those files manually is a pain, so you might well set up a
process to automate it. That then becomes a scheduled backup, from one
disk onto another.

That scheduled process means that you have periods where the most
recently updated copy of the live data hasn't made it into the backup,
so there's still a time window where you're at risk of data loss if the
first disk fails. So you might set things up for the automated process
to in effect run continuously, writing the data to both disks in
parallel as it comes in.

And at that point you've basically reinvented mirroring RAID.

You've also lost the protection against "if you delete something from
it"; unlike deeper, more robust forms of backup, RAID does not protect
against accidental deletion. But you still have the protection against
"if one disk fails" - and that one single layer of protection against
one single cause of data loss is, I contend, still valid to refer to as
a "backup" just as much as the original manually-made copies were.

> Some filesystems have snapshotting. Snapshotting can protect you
> from the accidental deletion scenario, by allowing you to recover
> quickly, but does not protect you from lightning.
> 
> The lightning scenario requires a copy of the data in some other 
> location. That's a backup.

There are many possible causes of data loss. My contention is that
anything that protects against *any* of them qualifies as some level of
backup, and that there are consequently multiple levels / tiers /
degrees / etc. of backup.

RAID is not an advanced form of protection against data loss; it only
protects against one type of cause. But it still does protect against
that one type, and thus it is not valid to kick it out of that circle
entirely.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to