> What is the best approach to handle incremental backup
> data, if hard disks are not that reliable this days?
> (This is a home system, and tape drives and variants are out!)
That depends on the size of your data.
How big are we talking about?
For me, I use Subversion to keep full history o
2009/12/6 Neil Aggarwal :
>> Which are the best marks of hard drives to purchase,
>> especially for linux-based systems that can be on for
>> relatively long periods -- 6-24 hours a day?
>
> I use Seagate drives on all my servers. They are running
> Linux and are on 24x7. Failures are very rare
On Sun, Dec 06, 2009 at 01:00:02PM +, Alan Bartlett wrote:
> >
> > I use Seagate drives on all my servers. ??They are running
> > Linux and are on 24x7. ??Failures are very rare and Seagate
> > replaces anything that fails within 5 years with no
> > hassle.
>
> +1 to Seagate. :-)
-1 to Seaga
2009/12/7 Konstantin Olchanski :
> On Sun, Dec 06, 2009 at 01:00:02PM +, Alan Bartlett wrote:
>> +1 to Seagate. :-)
>
>
> -1 to Seagate. Look up last year's scare with "Seagate disks
> brick themselves".
>
> Stop looking for the "best brand", read up on biodiversity.
Please do not make *assum
My experience is that the reputable brands have always been pretty good
in terms of how their drives behave when they go out of the door. The
problem comes when there's a problem that doesn't show up for six months
or a year, or some firmware interaction.
IBM, Seagate, WD have all had problems i
On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 12:17:29PM +, John Rowe wrote:
>
> IBM, Seagate, WD have all had problems in this way. IBM sold to Hitachi
> soon after their "Deathstar" problems.
>
Now that you mention the well known DeathStar lemons, for me, statistics
worked the wrong way round and I still have
