On Sun, 2003-12-28 at 10:27, Robert Huff wrote: > There are systems that will put 160 GB (uncompressed) on a > single tape ... they'll just run you $3000-3500. > If, on the other hand, you think of it as a yearly full dump > (split over multiple tapes) plus monthly incrementals then a DLT > 8000 ($1000 ??) at 40 GB (uncompressed) will do just fine. > > > Robert Huff
I'd like to throw in my (home) solution here. I have had a dedicated file server on my home network for years. It serves out files to clients on the network via SMB and HTTP. This machine stores all of my permanent (and not so permanent) data and has two large identical disks. Only the first is used. The other is used strictly to back up the information on the first. A cron job runs a script at 7AM every morning which powers up the backup disk, mounts it, performs an incremental backup and then powers down the backup disk again until the next morning. The moral: Buy double the amount of disk space that you think you'll need or settle for half of what you can afford. Then force yourself to use one half only to back up the other half. Disk-to-disk backup is probably the best way to go for the home user. It's cheap and it's easy, but it won't break the bank. Reliability is probably significantly less than a $3k tape solution, but careful monitoring of the system and quick response to potential problems can mitigate this to a large degree. Pretty soon I plan to move the backup disk to a separate machine on the network that gets powered up each day by some kind of external timer. The machine will power up, contact the file server, do an incremental backup, then shut itself off. This would put me just one step short of a complete daily off-site backup, all with hardware that is considered by most to be obsolete. Charles Ulrich -- http://bityard.net _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
