listserv.traf...@sloop.net wrote: > True enough, but that leaves two other problems. > > Theft or other loss or destruction of the mirrored drives. > In my scenario, one drive will be either off-site or protected in a > fire-proof safe. It will come on-site (or out of the safe) only to > refresh the mirror of the "live" archive.
That's definitely the ideal option, if you're willing (or have a go-fer required) to keep shuttling it back and forth. Of course, the less often you shuttle it, the more data you potentially lose when the active drive suddenly fails. > Also, since it's not running all the time, it's lifetime should > probably be longer - though in all honesty, that's probably not much > of an issue. It think it will result in less strain on the mirror drive, but I'm not sure how much. > I just most want to avoid losing all the copies of the backup archive > should the server get stolen or loss from fire etc. That basically > rules out a mirror of some kind - and perhaps the additional hardware > it would require. You can do a RAID0 using pretty much any kind of software RAID, but I agree the fire/theft argument is very valid. Matt Flaschen _______________________________________________ rdiff-backup-users mailing list at rdiff-backup-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki
