mustbemad wrote:
Found a piece of software from Disk Internals Research called Linux
Reader - free - seemed too good to be true!
http://www.diskinternals.com/
It mounted my disk on a Windows XP machine via USB, and reads every
file on it without any trouble. Just extracting all the data now.
Interesting point - I had never quantified the actual cost of leaving a
server on - so here are some live measurements costs per month given
my electricity supplier's rate of GBP 0.11 per KWh:
Xbox with one HD ~ 260mA ~ GBP 5
Libretto 70CT (weather station) ~ 38mA ~ GBP 0.72!
Vaio Laptop ~
Found a piece of software from Disk Internals Research called Linux
Reader - free - seemed too good to be true!
http://www.diskinternals.com/
It mounted my disk on a Windows XP machine via USB, and reads every
file on it without any trouble. Just extracting all the data now.
This is a great
an unfortunate way to learn about the vulnerability of RAID.
my two cents: I'm a television editor and the use of raids for storing
and quickly accessing massive amounts of video/audio media is
commonplace. what's also commonplace is Raids failing. Every company
I've ever worked for has gone
Two comments:
1. RAID is no substitute for backups. In my day job, I support a
database we maintain for a large national organisation. Back in 2002, a
RAID controller (Adaptec's top of the line model, not a cheapie) went
faulty and scribbled over ALL of the disks. So no matter how advanced
your
1. RAID is no substitute for backups.
Your right. IMHO raid is overrated for most private uses. It's sold as if
it were backup, but it's only about _availability_, reduced downtime etc.
- which is quite unimportant to most home users.
--
Michael
I use RAID 5 at home, primarily to avoid problems from failing hard drives.
In the 6 years I've had a RAID 5 setup, I've had one drive fail. Just being
able to swap in a new drive and have it running again was worth it for me.
I agree backups are also needed, preferably incremental backups with
cliveb;172973 Wrote:
RAID is no substitute for backups.
I agree too.
RAID will save you from a drive failure. Backups are needed to protect
from user error (rm -rf /) or some other hardware failure (RAM, drive
controller, etc) that causes bad data to be written to the arrray.
Offsite
Peter;172982 Wrote:
But it sounds like your data is still in danger. What happens if you or
one of your family make a mistake and delete the five years of family
photos
and *fail to notice*. Wouldn't the NAS backup faithfully overwrite the
previous backup and delete the photos?
My
You may also want to electrically isolate yourself from your neighbor's
power. Ground loops or power spikes could come across that CAT-5 and
zap your equipment and visa-versa.
Not sure though, how this would be done with wired ethernet, perhaps
there are some transformer based solutions.
Maybe
JJZolx;172996 Wrote:
My thoughts as well. Automated disk/folder syncs are a kind of
poor-man's backup plan and are subject to failures exactly like this.
The problem is that this type of backup only guards against hardware
failure and fails to guard against file corruption and human error.
Hey Guys
Interesting thread... I was in the process of splitting my single
Linux box into two linux boxes, so I could at least back up one to
another nightly... When the primary disk in it went North.
Good News: My Slimserver Library is on the good disk I just backed up
20 Gigs of digital
mustbemad wrote:
Anyone know any decent software which might be able to analyse
extract data from the bad disk? It seems mechanically OK, but has lost
ALL the Superblock backups possibly more. I've tried the usual CLI
utils to no avail and a free prog called TestDisk which wasn't able to
do
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:44:22 -0500, Bill Burns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
I can't help with the recovery, but before you mess with a single bit of
the content, best to clone the drive to a backup. I've been using an
excellent bootable command line bit-level disk copier which works with
any
mustbemad;173048 Wrote:
Hey Guys
Interesting thread... I was in the process of splitting my single
Linux box into two linux boxes, so I could at least back up one to
another nightly... When the primary disk in it went North.
Good News: My Slimserver Library is on the good disk I just
http://rsnapshot.org
I love it myself :-). And I'm also using the
second-disk-mounted-read-only-during-the-day approach. Additionally I
started rsyncing the daily.0 to a remote machine...
note: I'm surprised people keep thinking RAID is for backup, when
pretty much any thread or doc you
bklaas;173060 Wrote:
why would you need to setup two linux boxes for drive backup purposes?
Cos if I'm using one machine the power supply catches fire - or
something similar - I'd potentially lose both disks. With two - the
house my burn down, but maybe I'd still have data in one place!
mustbemad;173078 Wrote:
Cos if I'm using one machine the power supply catches fire - or
something similar - I'd potentially lose both disks. With two - the
house my burn down, but maybe I'd still have data in one place!
Thanks for the replys guys! I am running Linux - Debian on one
Here's a couple things I do that have saved me a lot of grief.
First, anything that goes on the file server (music, photos,
documents, family videos) gets backed up to DVD-R first. I also keep
extra DVD-R copies of irreplaceable stuff like family photos in a safe
deposit box.
The file server
19 matches
Mail list logo
