Re: 1.5TB drives due in August!

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Enkidu, Jul 11, 2008.

  1. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:07:02 +1200, Brian Mathews wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:50:33 +1200, thingy <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/10/seagate_1point5tb_hdd/
    >>>
    >>> As the articla says 1Tb might drop as a result....goodie...

    >> And how do you back them up..??

    >

    .....
    >
    > Using a Raid array?
    >

    A RAID array is not a substitute for a backup. What happens if your
    array controller goes bung and writes crap to all your disks? It does
    happen.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 11, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Enkidu

    Richard Guest

    Enkidu wrote:
    > Freesias wrote:
    >> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:07:02 +1200, Brian Mathews wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:50:33 +1200, thingy <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/10/seagate_1point5tb_hdd/
    >>>>
    >>>> As the articla says 1Tb might drop as a result....goodie...
    >>> And how do you back them up..??

    >>

    > ....
    >>
    >> Using a Raid array?
    >>

    > A RAID array is not a substitute for a backup. What happens if your
    > array controller goes bung and writes crap to all your disks? It does
    > happen.
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Cliff
    >


    Do what I do and have 2 computers with raids in them, one in the house,
    one in a shed and save stuff to both of them.

    Emails I save to a pst on both raids and also into my gmail account now
    they have imap sorted.

    Media on both machines, with less critical things on only one of them
    (things I have on dvd or should be able to get off a friend)

    My docs on both machines and both desktops synced with microsoft mesh
    (used to use groove till I went 64 bit and found that they didnt have
    support for it)

    Make a total backup of the docs often since mesh has issues with lots of
    files.

    If I rebuild one machine with 1TB discs instead of the 200s in it that
    would give me.... craploads of space ;)
     
    Richard, Jul 11, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:57:55 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >> A RAID array is not a substitute for a backup. What happens if your
    >> array controller goes bung and writes crap to all your disks? It does
    >> happen.

    >
    > That's what you use your off-site backup for. :eek:)
    >
    > But if you only had a HDD failure, then a raid array will result in a
    > quick fix by replacing the hardware.
    >

    Yes, Lennier, we all know that, but you suggested using RAID as a backup.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 12, 2008
    #3
  4. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:12:55 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >>> But if you only had a HDD failure, then a raid array will result in a
    >>> quick fix by replacing the hardware.
    >>>

    >> Yes, Lennier, we all know that, but you suggested using RAID as a
    >> backup.

    >
    > Yes - and it serves well in the event of a HDD failure - which is what
    > backups are there to protect from.
    >

    Yes, but coming back to the original point, which you constantly stray
    from, RAID is NOT a form of backup, and you included RAID in your list
    of backup methods.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 13, 2008
    #4
  5. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 11:39:55 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >>>>> But if you only had a HDD failure, then a raid array will result in a
    >>>>> quick fix by replacing the hardware.
    >>>>>
    >>>> Yes, Lennier, we all know that, but you suggested using RAID as a
    >>>> backup.
    >>> Yes - and it serves well in the event of a HDD failure - which is what
    >>> backups are there to protect from.
    >>>

    >> Yes, but coming back to the original point, which you constantly stray
    >> from, RAID is NOT a form of backup, and you included RAID in your list
    >> of backup methods.

    >
    > It is a means of preserving data in the event of HDD failure.
    >
    > Is that not what a backup is?
    >

    No.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 13, 2008
    #5
  6. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:59:05 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >>>> Yes, but coming back to the original point, which you
    >>>> constantly stray from, RAID is NOT a form of backup, and you
    >>>> included RAID in your list of backup methods.
    >>> It is a means of preserving data in the event of HDD failure.
    >>>
    >>> Is that not what a backup is?
    >>>

    >> No.

    >
    > So, in your considered opinion backups are not a means of preserving
    > data in the event of the original document being unavailable.
    >
    > Interesting that you think that.
    >

    That is not what I said and RAID does NOT '(preserve) data in the event
    of the original document being unavailable'.

    You said '(RAID) is a means of preserving data in the event of HDD
    failure'. This is true, but you'd better fix the HDD failure PDQ!!

    Then you asked if *that* was what a backup is. The answer to that is
    *NO*. A backup is a means of preserving data *away from the original
    system*, preferably off site. A backup is static, a point in time
    snapshot, whereas a RAID is still part of the original system and
    changes all the time. Therefore RAID is not a backup.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 13, 2008
    #6
  7. Enkidu

    JohnO Guest

    On Jul 11, 7:57 pm, Enkidu <> wrote:
    > Freesias wrote:
    > > On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:07:02 +1200, Brian Mathews wrote:

    >
    > >> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:50:33 +1200, thingy <>
    > >> wrote:

    >
    > >>>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/10/seagate_1point5tb_hdd/

    >
    > >>> As the articla says 1Tb might drop as a result....goodie...
    > >> And how do you back them up..??

    >
    > ....
    >
    > > Using a Raid array?

    >
    > A RAID array is not a substitute for a backup. What happens if your
    > array controller goes bung and writes crap to all your disks? It does
    > happen.
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Cliff
    >



    Indeed. And if something simply overwrites a critical file it is gone
    from both RAID systems as well.
     
    JohnO, Jul 13, 2008
    #7
  8. Enkidu

    JohnO Guest

    On Jul 12, 10:41 pm, Freesias <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:12:55 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    > >> But if you only had a HDD failure, then a raid array will result in a
    > >> quick fix by replacing the hardware.

    >
    > > Yes, Lennier, we all know that, but you suggested using RAID as a
    > > backup.

    >
    > Yes - and it serves well in the event of a HDD failure - which is what
    > backups are there to protect from.


    Wrong.

    What if a user makes a mistake and overwrites a file? As Cliff says,
    RAID (and replication) just means the screwup is also imposed on the
    alternate storage. A proper backup is a separate copy of the data that
    is stored elsewhere.

    This backup doesn't have to be tape. It can be an image and preferably
    journals on a separate hard drive system.
     
    JohnO, Jul 13, 2008
    #8
  9. Enkidu

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>, Freesias@Spring-
    Bulbs.com says...
    > On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:28:49 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    > > Then you asked if *that* was what a backup is. The answer to that is
    > > *NO*. A backup is a means of preserving data *away from the original
    > > system*,

    >
    > Actually, a "backup" is any effective means to recover a document in the
    > event that the original becomes unusable.
    >
    > There are various degrees to which the means of recovery is implemented.
    >
    > A "backup" could be as simple as another clean, unused copy located in
    > another directory. Obviously the extent that the backup is useful depends
    > on what causes the original document to become unusable.
    >
    > The ultimate backup is, of course, as you said away from the original
    > system and offsite in a secure storage facility, but a mirror of the HDD
    > is also a useful means of backup provided the file stored on the HDD and
    > mirror are not both corrupted or otherwise made unusable.


    The purpose of a RAID array is not to backup - it is to provide fault
    redundancy. Give it up man.

    --
    Duncan
     
    Dave Doe, Jul 14, 2008
    #9
  10. Enkidu

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>, Freesias@Spring-
    Bulbs.com says...
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:46:48 +1200, Dave Doe wrote:
    >
    > >> There are various degrees to which the means of recovery is
    > >> implemented.
    > >>
    > >> A "backup" could be as simple as another clean, unused copy located in
    > >> another directory. Obviously the extent that the backup is useful
    > >> depends on what causes the original document to become unusable.
    > >>
    > >> The ultimate backup is, of course, as you said away from the original
    > >> system and offsite in a secure storage facility, but a mirror of the
    > >> HDD is also a useful means of backup provided the file stored on the
    > >> HDD and mirror are not both corrupted or otherwise made unusable.

    > >
    > > The purpose of a RAID array is not to backup - it is to provide fault
    > > redundancy.

    >
    > I think what you said is merely alternative words for "protecting data in
    > the event of hardware failure".


    Well that's true - however if that's the case, I think you are defining
    backup incorrectly (even if the dictionary satisfies the definition
    literally, it is not the correct definition (IMO) in this context).

    You backup data so that when user X tells you they want file abc back
    from two months back, you can do it.

    Or say said user deletes, or say changes a file, how will they get the
    orginal back if they ask for it?

    That's what backups are for, you schedule a cycle, depending on value of
    data and budget for backup.

    And while I agree that sending the data off to another machine is,
    indeed a backup - it surely should not be a RAID device, that's just a
    waste of disc. Better isn't it, to use both discs, keep lots of sets?
    It's not *my* ideal backup though, the data is still local (if the
    building burns to the ground, yer toast - 'scuse pun).

    --
    Duncan
     
    Dave Doe, Jul 15, 2008
    #10
  11. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Dave Doe wrote:
    > In article <>, Freesias@Spring-
    > Bulbs.com says...
    >> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:28:49 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    >>
    >>> Then you asked if *that* was what a backup is. The answer to that is
    >>> *NO*. A backup is a means of preserving data *away from the original
    >>> system*,

    >> Actually, a "backup" is any effective means to recover a document in the
    >> event that the original becomes unusable.
    >>
    >> There are various degrees to which the means of recovery is implemented.
    >>
    >> A "backup" could be as simple as another clean, unused copy located in
    >> another directory. Obviously the extent that the backup is useful depends
    >> on what causes the original document to become unusable.
    >>
    >> The ultimate backup is, of course, as you said away from the original
    >> system and offsite in a secure storage facility, but a mirror of the HDD
    >> is also a useful means of backup provided the file stored on the HDD and
    >> mirror are not both corrupted or otherwise made unusable.

    >
    > The purpose of a RAID array is not to backup - it is to provide fault
    > redundancy. Give it up man.
    >

    You don't know Lennier do you? I'm silly to be still arguing with him
    about it.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 15, 2008
    #11
  12. Enkidu

    EMB Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:46 +1200, Dave Doe wrote:
    >
    >> You backup data so that when user X tells you they want file abc back
    >> from two months back, you can do it.

    >
    > Yes - but that is a specific type of backup. And YES - RAID would not do
    > that. TAPE archives can do that.
    >
    > But, nevertheless, as you have agreed, a backup is primarily the means to
    > preserve data in the event of hardware failure.


    Lets assume you have a wee disaster like a decent sort of lightning
    strike[1] on your data centre. It's possibly going to fry the fsck out
    of all your RAID arrays, at which stage RAID whatever is going to do you
    slightly less than no good at all. By the time the PHBs have finished
    with you you'll be wishing the lightning had got you as well.

    A tape backup, even a few days old, and preferably stored off site will
    enable normality to be restored relatively quickly and easily. It will
    also tend to lead to the PHBs viewing you as a minor deity for managing
    to actually recover the data once new hardware has been sourced.

    > It seems to me that the majority of the restorations that are done from
    > tape are to compensate for the stupidity of users.


    Or more importantly the requests of auditors, especially the forensic
    flavoured ones.


    [1] BTDTGTTS. The client lost a couple of UPSs, the backup generator,
    all the core switches and routers, most of the contents of their data
    centre, their PABX, a variety of fixed cabling throughout the building
    and assorted other equipment. 36 hours later they had access to all
    their business critical data and systems on new hardware restored from
    tape at an alternate location.
     
    EMB, Jul 15, 2008
    #12
  13. Enkidu

    EMB Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > Thirdly you ask nicely for it to be restored from a reecnt nightly backup
    > after first proven that you have tried all other means. :eek:)


    IME you normally need to go back the best part of a month to find most
    of the "missing" files.
     
    EMB, Jul 15, 2008
    #13
  14. Enkidu

    EMB Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:55:31 +1200, EMB wrote:
    >
    >> [1] BTDTGTTS. The client lost a couple of UPSs, the backup generator,
    >> all the core switches and routers, most of the contents of their data
    >> centre, their PABX, a variety of fixed cabling throughout the building
    >> and assorted other equipment. 36 hours later they had access to all
    >> their business critical data and systems on new hardware restored from
    >> tape at an alternate location.

    >
    > That sort of recovery should be even faster if a proper DR system is in
    > place - recovery "at the flick of a switch" failing over your production
    > system to your DR boxes located at another datacentre.


    The business in question wasn't large enough financially to justify the
    cost of a live DR platform. With only 36 hours downtime in the event of
    a *major* disaster that decision was proven valid.

    Incidentally, having a live DR platform in a remote location does not
    eliminate the need for backups. If you can't work out the reasons for
    yourself then you're even less intelligent than you appear.
     
    EMB, Jul 15, 2008
    #14
  15. Enkidu

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>, Freesias@Spring-
    Bulbs.com says...
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:46 +1200, Dave Doe wrote:
    >
    > > You backup data so that when user X tells you they want file abc back
    > > from two months back, you can do it.

    >
    > Yes - but that is a specific type of backup. And YES - RAID would not do
    > that. TAPE archives can do that.
    >
    > But, nevertheless, as you have agreed, a backup is primarily the means to
    > preserve data in the event of hardware failure.


    Don't put words in my mouth; where did I say that? - it's primary
    purpose is to restore data (the hardware is, in most cases I deal with,
    running just fine).

    --
    Duncan
     
    Dave Doe, Jul 15, 2008
    #15
  16. Enkidu

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>, Freesias@Spring-
    Bulbs.com says...
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:46 +1200, Dave Doe wrote:
    >
    > > Or say said user deletes, or say changes a file, how will they get the
    > > orginal back if they ask for it?
    > >
    > > That's what backups are for, you schedule a cycle, depending on value of
    > > data and budget for backup.

    >
    > Actually, no that is not their _primary_ purpose. That is a secondary
    > added benefit.


    Look you've already agreed with me in the other recent posts - why
    disagree now?

    OK, I'll bite, what is the primary purpose of a backup, given you think
    it's not what I think it is - which is to restore important data?

    On a Server, that is probably the whole 'thing' - OS and data. On a
    home PC, it might be 'My Documents' only. I will maintain that it
    depends on the importance of the data and the budget invested in the
    backup (which generally equates to the downtime - the time it will take
    to restore).

    BTW, on Servers I maintain, I make it quite clear to users that if they
    want to store anything important (presumably their data), it goes "in"
    'My Documents' - anywhere, I don't care. If they put it outside of
    that, they are well aware it's not backed up, not by me anyway. I
    consider backing up anything outside of the Server a poor use of my time
    and resources in general - that's what Server's are *for* -
    centralisation of data.

    Further, some clients need high availabilty workstations. RAID array?
    NO! Spare machines, or other peoples machines, or roaming profiles -
    etc - depends on the business itself of course. A RAID array on a
    workstation is more likely to be a RAID0 array on a high end graphics
    workstation, Raptor drives and the like.


    But a backup - it is not. It is no more a backup than is a multiple PSU
    array on a server - ie it's for fault tolerance - keep the server
    *going* - not back it up.

    --
    Duncan
     
    Dave Doe, Jul 15, 2008
    #16
  17. Enkidu

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>, Freesias@Spring-
    Bulbs.com says...
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:46 +1200, Dave Doe wrote:
    >
    > > Or say said user deletes, or say changes a file, how will they get the
    > > orginal back if they ask for it?

    >
    > You first look to see if you can salvage it from within Netware. :eek:)
    >
    > Secondly, you look to see if there was a temp version saved somewhere.
    >
    > Thirdly you ask nicely for it to be restored from a reecnt nightly backup
    > after first proven that you have tried all other means. :eek:)


    Hmmm so the RAID array's not gonna help much.

    --
    Duncan
     
    Dave Doe, Jul 15, 2008
    #17
  18. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    EMB wrote:
    >
    > A tape backup, even a few days old, and preferably stored off site
    > will enable normality to be restored relatively quickly and easily.
    > It will also tend to lead to the PHBs viewing you as a minor deity
    > for managing to actually recover the data once new hardware has been
    > sourced.
    >

    I agree with this mostly, but I can't help returning to my theme, tape
    backups are doomed. We need other technologies. If a tape takes 20 hours
    to backup it's going to take a lot longer to restore. Some businesses
    can't afford to be out for a couple of days. And some businesses can't
    afford an off-site warm DR scenario. Yes, you can do a lot with a decent
    DR plan, even perform wonders, but if you rely on tapes you would need a
    pretty clever plan to be back up in a reasonable time frame

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 15, 2008
    #18
  19. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Freesias wrote:
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:56:29 +1200, EMB wrote:
    >
    >> Freesias wrote:
    >>> Thirdly you ask nicely for it to be restored from a reecnt nightly
    >>> backup after first proven that you have tried all other means. :eek:)

    >> IME you normally need to go back the best part of a month to find most
    >> of the "missing" files.

    >
    > I would ask the user when they last could access a good version of that
    > file, and then go back to that date and a little before.
    >

    To which the user usually replies "I dunno". Then you have to search the
    backup catalogs.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 15, 2008
    #19
  20. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Dave Doe wrote:
    >
    > Look you've already agreed with me in the other recent posts - why
    > disagree now?
    >

    You are conversing with Lennier. He hasn't moved on from Windows ME and
    he thinks he knows everything.
    >
    > But a backup - it is not. It is no more a backup than is a multiple PSU
    > array on a server - ie it's for fault tolerance - keep the server
    > *going* - not back it up.
    >

    We all know that. Lennier doesn't. Only Lennier will dispute with you on
    the matter.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - someone on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Jul 15, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Enkidu

    Re: 1.5TB drives due in August!

    Enkidu, Jul 11, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    373
    Enkidu
    Jul 13, 2008
  2. Mike Dee

    Re: 1.5TB drives due in August!

    Mike Dee, Jul 13, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    382
    Enkidu
    Jul 15, 2008
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Re: 1.5TB drives due in August!

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jul 14, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    346
    Enkidu
    Jul 17, 2008
  4. ~misfit~

    Re: 1.5tb drives!

    ~misfit~, Oct 3, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    413
    Stephen Worthington
    Oct 10, 2008
  5. Chris Wilkinson

    Re: 1.5tb drives!

    Chris Wilkinson, Oct 3, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    859
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Oct 8, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page