Comments on: Archives: Redux http://systemsboy.com/2009/11/archives-redux.html Big, Honkin' Systems Stuff Mon, 09 Jan 2012 19:19:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Data Backup http://systemsboy.com/2009/11/archives-redux.html/comment-page-1#comment-1469 Data Backup Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:16:20 +0000 http://systemsboy.com/?p=3027#comment-1469 I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often. I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

]]> By: Matt Smith http://systemsboy.com/2009/11/archives-redux.html/comment-page-1#comment-1466 Matt Smith Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:29:52 +0000 http://systemsboy.com/?p=3027#comment-1466 Well the good thing about a Drobo (besides its expense) is that as long as they're SATA drives, it doesn't matter what RPM, what manufacturer, what capacity etc. It will take any SATA disk. I had a 1.5TB drive go (when I only had the one). The data auto secured itself over the remaining 3 750GB drives (thankfully I just about had enough capacity with those 3 drives). That took about 19 hours. I replaced the faulty 1.5TB drive, it secured all the data again (this took about 48 hours). All the time the Drobo is useable. I believe technically its slower but I didn't really notice. That's why I think it's an ideal long term storage solution, as long as you have a spare SATA drive to protect against long-term failure then I think it's an ideal, although perhaps costly, solution. Well the good thing about a Drobo (besides its expense) is that as long as they’re SATA drives, it doesn’t matter what RPM, what manufacturer, what capacity etc. It will take any SATA disk.

I had a 1.5TB drive go (when I only had the one). The data auto secured itself over the remaining 3 750GB drives (thankfully I just about had enough capacity with those 3 drives). That took about 19 hours. I replaced the faulty 1.5TB drive, it secured all the data again (this took about 48 hours). All the time the Drobo is useable. I believe technically its slower but I didn’t really notice.

That’s why I think it’s an ideal long term storage solution, as long as you have a spare SATA drive to protect against long-term failure then I think it’s an ideal, although perhaps costly, solution.

]]> By: systemsboy http://systemsboy.com/2009/11/archives-redux.html/comment-page-1#comment-1463 systemsboy Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:57:38 +0000 http://systemsboy.com/?p=3027#comment-1463 I keep hearing about Drobos, and they sound promising for certain applications. I've heard about some people having problems with them, but those may have been in the early days of the device. I've heard a lot of good buzz as well, and I've considered them from time to time. I'm not sure I could quite justify the expense of one yet; I just don't have that much data. I'm also not convinced it would make a great longer-term solution, as you mentioned. I would add that a RAID device might not be totally appropriate for longer term archiving because of the trouble and expense of reconstructing the RAID, and because of the interdependency of the drives for said reconstruction. Nonetheless, Drobo remains on my radar as an intriguing short-term backup solution for certain situations, and mine could certainly turn into one of those situations someday. Thanks for the info. I find the bit about Sun really intriguing. -systemsboy I keep hearing about Drobos, and they sound promising for certain applications. I’ve heard about some people having problems with them, but those may have been in the early days of the device. I’ve heard a lot of good buzz as well, and I’ve considered them from time to time. I’m not sure I could quite justify the expense of one yet; I just don’t have that much data. I’m also not convinced it would make a great longer-term solution, as you mentioned. I would add that a RAID device might not be totally appropriate for longer term archiving because of the trouble and expense of reconstructing the RAID, and because of the interdependency of the drives for said reconstruction.

Nonetheless, Drobo remains on my radar as an intriguing short-term backup solution for certain situations, and mine could certainly turn into one of those situations someday.

Thanks for the info. I find the bit about Sun really intriguing.

-systemsboy

]]> By: Matt Smith http://systemsboy.com/2009/11/archives-redux.html/comment-page-1#comment-1462 Matt Smith Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:55:41 +0000 http://systemsboy.com/?p=3027#comment-1462 I read the post preceding this, but didn't comment. Personally, for home stuff (and by home stuff I also mean a lot of private work I do for people, contracts, video stuff, web stuff, a hell of a lot of personal photography, and time machine backups for 3/4 macs) I use something called a Drobo. It currently has 2x 1.5TB drives and a couple of 750GB drives in it. If you're not familiar with the Drobo it's a kind of 'magic' RAID (they call it BeyondRAID). It has many of the properties of RAID (perhaps not speed, at least with the standard Drobo), but you can put any sized drive in. The unit takes 4 drives, you can start off with just two. As one drive gets full you just eject that and stick in a larger one. The Drobo then goes about copying any data so that it's all resilient. The Drobo has a hard limit of 16TB, but that's a hell of a lot of storage in a fairly small box. Now obviously this is stuck with the SATA interface, but perhaps the more useful feature is that it converts that into USB/FW. For the foreseeable future (5 years I guess) you'll be able to get SATA drives, and when you can't you'll just be able to keep this as a resillient boxed archive (perhaps keep one/two spare drives on hand for long term archival purposes incase a drive fails and you can't purchase them anymore). As drives change, just buy a similar device with whatever interface drives use then and carry on like that. As long as FW/USB remains backwards compatible you'll not have to re-archive. Interestingly Sun are heading towards SSD type storage for long-term / archival storage. Their thinking behind this is that SSD is far more resillient to corruption issues, and for large archival purposes there's a huge net benefit of lower electricity costs (HDD's keep spinning, regardless of whether the data's being accessed). I think if Sun are planning on moving to drives as apposed to optical / tape then it's a pretty sure bet that that's what everyone will be doing (at least in the Enterprise). I read the post preceding this, but didn’t comment. Personally, for home
stuff (and by home stuff I also mean a lot of private work I do for
people, contracts, video stuff, web stuff, a hell of a lot of personal
photography, and time machine backups for 3/4 macs) I use something
called a Drobo.

It currently has 2x 1.5TB drives and a couple of 750GB drives in it. If
you’re not familiar with the Drobo it’s a kind of ‘magic’ RAID (they
call it BeyondRAID). It has many of the properties of RAID (perhaps not
speed, at least with the standard Drobo), but you can put any sized
drive in. The unit takes 4 drives, you can start off with just two. As
one drive gets full you just eject that and stick in a larger one. The
Drobo then goes about copying any data so that it’s all resilient. The
Drobo has a hard limit of 16TB, but that’s a hell of a lot of storage in
a fairly small box.

Now obviously this is stuck with the SATA interface, but perhaps the
more useful feature is that it converts that into USB/FW. For the
foreseeable future (5 years I guess) you’ll be able to get SATA drives,
and when
you can’t you’ll just be able to keep this as a resillient boxed archive
(perhaps keep one/two spare drives on hand for long term archival
purposes incase a drive fails and you can’t purchase them anymore). As drives change, just buy a similar device with whatever
interface drives use then and carry on like that. As long as FW/USB
remains backwards compatible you’ll not have to re-archive.

Interestingly Sun are heading towards SSD type storage for long-term /
archival storage. Their thinking behind this is that SSD is far more
resillient to corruption issues, and for large archival purposes there’s
a huge net benefit of lower electricity costs (HDD’s keep spinning,
regardless of whether the data’s being accessed). I think if Sun are
planning on moving to drives as apposed to optical / tape then it’s a
pretty sure bet that that’s what everyone will be doing (at least in the Enterprise).

]]> By: systemsboy http://systemsboy.com/2009/11/archives-redux.html/comment-page-1#comment-1459 systemsboy Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:31:38 +0000 http://systemsboy.com/?p=3027#comment-1459 Yes, I may have erred slightly in my assumptions about the death of optical. Thanks be to the good old TASB community for righting my course. Being able to have perspective-altering discussions about this stuff is one of my favorite bonuses about having this site. -systemsboy Yes, I may have erred slightly in my assumptions about the death of optical. Thanks be to the good old TASB community for righting my course. Being able to have perspective-altering discussions about this stuff is one of my favorite bonuses about having this site.

-systemsboy

]]> By: Rodrigo M. Ramos http://systemsboy.com/2009/11/archives-redux.html/comment-page-1#comment-1458 Rodrigo M. Ramos Sun, 15 Nov 2009 23:09:16 +0000 http://systemsboy.com/?p=3027#comment-1458 Very interesting arguments here. Looking over the past 25 years, optical media always kept backward compatibility. Modern Blue-Ray drives are still able to read CDs, DVDs and DL-DVDs. On the other side, HD interfaces are usually incompatible with each other, like SCSI, ATA and SATA. Very good post, like always. Regards, Rodrigo Very interesting arguments here. Looking over the past 25 years, optical media always kept backward compatibility. Modern Blue-Ray drives are still able to read CDs, DVDs and DL-DVDs. On the other side, HD interfaces are usually incompatible with each other, like SCSI, ATA and SATA.

Very good post, like always.

Regards,
Rodrigo

]]>