Slashdot Mirror
Affordable Home Backups for 10-100G Systems?
MichaelJames asks: "Ok, I have my MP3's streaming, all our digital pictures up, and a file server running on one machine in the basement. What would be the best way to do simple backups of the system and data? Get a tape drive Get a CDRW or DVDRW to backup the MP3 and pics, but use the old Zip drive for the file server data?" With drives in the 10-20 gig range only getting smaller and less expensive, what are we to do for backups, that have yet to scale well in the same range. For home systems with up to 100G of storage, what do you use to back up that much data, with a solution that's affordable to the average computer user? Have DVD writers become cheap enough for serious consideration as a backup media?
Given that a 100G hard drive is cheaper than any removable media solution, why not just buy another hard drive and install it in a removable (not hot-swappable, just removable) rack?
Racks are $20 at my local Fry's, and inserts for other hard drives are $10.
Just get a lot (A LOT) of 1.44MB floppy disks...
----
WWJD...For a Klondike Bar?
Hey, I've got all these 5 1/4" floppy disks sitting in boxes in a back closet. I bet if I added them all up, they would amount to close to 100 GB.
CD-R/CD-RW are too slow and too small, plan on spending a day or so swapping disks. You can always mirror to another hard drive, get a basic RAID card or just use a Ghost-like program to do manual backups. But tape is still cheaper per megabyte and more reliable. Sure, you can damage a tape, but it's harder to do than with a hard drive. SCSI tape drives are more expensive than another drive, but fast enough, and allow you to keep multiple versions or copies of your backup. Try that with hard drives and you need arrays. Tape starts looking REAL cheap then.
Ignorance is the root of all evil.
I have a 100BaseT network, and a server computer that resides in a different room from the rest of my systems. I rotate backups using those aluminum drive caddies. A pair of 60G drives turned out to be MUCH cheaper than the equivalent size tape backup. Every day, I rotate out the drive at the end of the day, and swap with the other. The spare I keep in a fireproof safe. Just tarball the appropriate directories. Done. Poof. Much faster than the average DDS3 tape drive too. Runs at night and I don't even notice it.
I have to say that this is coming from someone with a total of around 280gig at the house, but...
Out of 100gig, how much do you really NEED to back up?
The vast majority of my space is taken up by MP3s (where I converted my CD collection), but that could easily be replaced. To tell you the truth, of the things that I would need (documents, pictures, etc), I could easily fit it all onto a CDR. Well, maybe two. (I take lots of pictures)
Basically it boils down to, do you really need to shell out the money for that extra drive?
:^)
'Life is like a spoonful of Drain-O, it feels good on the way down but leaves you feeling hollow inside'
Why are you bothering to back up your data?
/` or a virus)? If so, then a RAID solution is useless.
That may seem like a stupid question, but you need to consider the reasons you want to have a backup before you settle on a method.
Are you afraid of your drive failing? If so, then using a RAID solution should cover you.
Are you afraid of losing your whole system (perhaps due to lightning or theft)? If so, then your backup must be kept physically isolated from your system.
Are you afraid of accidentally deleting files (such as `rm -rf
Are you afraid of having your system down for an hour or two while you replace a drive? If so, then regardless of other issues, you need a RAID setup.
Do you want to use your MP3s with some other device? If so, you probably want CD-R copies.
Of course, there are other considerations that I haven't mentioned or thought of.
Clearly the answer, for easy backups of a 100G drive, is 21 iPods.
sulli
RTFJ.
A lot of people have mentioned that disk to disk backup seems to be the best way to go.
I agree.
What hasn't been mentioned is rsync, which makes disk to (local or remote) disk backups fast and easy.
It is trival to set up a second disk that is a "stale" mirror of your primary disk(s) that backs up nightly, and will boot off a floppy. This captures some of the advantage of RAID (quick recovery) while being an actual backup, not just fault tolerance.
Rsync can use ssh as a transport, so you can securely back up remote disks as well.
-Peter
RAID offers good protection for some things: hardware failure (ie: HD crash) and uptime. That aren't the only woes, however... You can loose data in a lot of ways:
Disaster (fire, quake, flood, nuff said)
Hardware failure (disk, controller, ...)
OS failure (FS corruption, ...)
Application failure (User space applications malbehaving, virii, ...)
User failure (accidental deletes, experimental children - trust me on this one ;-)
:)
...) are a plus, but more cumbersome.
RAID will protect you from the second, but will happily add nothing in case of any of the other failures. Backing up to another media is a necessity.
Adding an extra disk (or two, or three), and some tar/cpio cronjobs will add basic protection. (No disaster recovery for you, unless it's off-site
Removable harddrives (firewire, frames,
Tape is considered a more 'trustworthy' backup medium because the mechanism and data storage are separated (ie: tape drive / tape), while in a HD it's in one single package, and it's not as easy to replace the logic board/stepper motor if this flunks. With tape it's easier: just get a new tapedrive.
Anyhow: don't rely on RAID to save your data - it won't.
Okay... I'll do the stupid things first, then you shy people follow.
[Zappa]
I'm sharing my cable modem via 802.11 with all the neighbors and since I am the local "neighborhood helpdesk technician", they often come to me for advice. Recently, one of them wanted to know how to go about backing things up properly. It dawned on me that hard drive space is abundant and most people are buying much more than they need (the person in question has an 80 gig at about 20% capacity). So I worked out a deal so that everyone is backing up to each other's PC at night on a weekly basis. The 802.11b connection keeps drive thrashing to a minimum yet provides enough speed for complete backup on an overnight basis.
I should start charging for these ideas... Can't wait for the proliferation of freenet!
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
There are two ways you can go relatively cheaply, and IMHO a far better solution than CD-R or CD-RW.
Pick up a DLT2000XT (15gb native) off ebay for about $200. Tapes are dirt cheap, about $5/ea and the media is extremely durable, nearly indestructible.
Pick up a DLT1 (40gb native) off ebay, about $500. Tapes are moderately expensive at around $20/ea, but again the media is extremely durable.
DLT is industrial strength backup, the drives are built like tanks and the tapes can take incredible abuse.
Its all standard SCSI and works great with linux, no problems whatsoever.
I considered buying hard drives for backups, but they are far too fragile for long term backup and off-site storage. Most drives arent designed to be spun up and down lots of times either.
Last thing you need is for your backup harddisk to go splat when youre trying to power it up to restore your main system from a data loss.
With DLT, this isnt likely to happen.
I'm classifiable as an audio addict, having taken my entire personal
/boot
/home
/pchome
/pub
/pub/mp3
/scratch
/pub/mp3_2
/pub/software
/etc/cron.hourly/rsync_with_fumus script:
/pub
/pub
/pub
:-)
collection of CD's and ripped them to MP3's at 320 bit, and wanted to
have them stored in a central place, accessible from any machine in my
home. Currently this collection is at approximately 620 full CD's of
music, and I'm pushing right at, or just above the 80 gigabyte limit.
Now when you factor in personal files, financial records, games,
downloaded material, installation software you don't want to lose,
etc...etc... Well, see for yourself. Here's my space breakdown for the
partitions on my main file server Fumus (Smoke, in Latin):
fumus:/pub/mp3 # df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda3 3.0G 2.1G 804M 72% /
/dev/hda1 129M 6.8M 115M 6%
/dev/hda5 9.8G 1.8M 9.3G 1%
/dev/hda6 20G 13G 6.3G 67%
/dev/hda8 40G 22G 17G 57%
/dev/hdb1 75G 38G 33G 53%
/dev/hda7 1.9G 20k 1.8G 1%
/dev/hdc1 74G 34G 40G 46%
/dev/hdd1 74G 36G 37G 49%
So, here's what I looked at:
Tape: For the size I'd need: Way WAY too expensive. When I brought
the media down into the range I'd afford, I'd be swapping tapes all week
to get a backup done. Not time effective.
CD-R: Faster, yes, but at 650 megabytes per media, same problem as
tape, only you've traded magne tic for optical.
Extra hard drives in the same machine: Originally, this is exactly what
I had done with a single file server running Reiser file systems in the
more experimental days. I got the scare (and lesson) of my life when
Reiser went a bit nuts, and started corrupting some of my data. I only
lost about one percent, but I vowed, never never NEVER again would I
backup data on a critical machine on live media in the same machine.
Okay, so here's what I finally DID select as my solution: A second
machine called Ignis (Fire in Latin) that uses the absolutely identical
configuration, right down to the types and number of drives, partition
sizes, everything. They both connect into my 100Mb network switch, and
Ignis rsync's from Fumus every hour on the hour thanks to scripts in
/etc/cron.hourly
In fact, here's Ignis'
rsync -arul --one-file-system --quiet fumus:/pub/mp3_2
rsync -arul --one-file-system --quiet fumus:/pub/mp3
rsync -azrul --one-file-system --quiet --delete --force fumus:/pub/software
rsync -azrul --one-file-system --quiet --delete --force fumus:/pub /
rsync -azrul --one-file-system --quiet --delete --force fumus:/pchome /
Is this a bit extreme? Yes. But... if, gods forbid, Fumus really does
let out its magic smoke, or Ignis does catch on fire, and the physical
media were actually damaged, hopefully the damage would be limited to
*one* case, and wouldn't end up taking both machines out. Then I really
would be crying the blues.
Oh yes, and each machine is on their own 900VA UPS. I'm not playing
THAT game.
Not to distro-bait, but Debian in particular shines here because apt makes it so damn easy to bring a system back to the state you wanted. For myself I have created a meta-package (.deb) which does nothing but depend on the applications I want installed on every desktop system: galeon, gnucash, xchat, gaim, xmms, vim-gtk, and a handful of others. Then I back up my meta-package, all of 10k including a few shell scripts I wrote for myself. Install my meta-package on a new system, and voilá, apt fetches and installs every app, that I need to continue working, dependencies included.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
That worked really well for backing up our 80MB drives onto stacks of 1.44MB floppies, since you would really only need to insert about 5-10 floppies during your weekly backup, just to get the files that changed.
So why not just do incremental backup onto CD-Rs? Even with 100GB of archives, most of those are static. You probably won't need to use more than one CDR per week (maybe two) to track the changes. It's cheap, relatively painless if you've got the right software (and it wouldn't be hard to throw together incremental backup/recovery scripts in Perl if you're into that sort of thing.) and you've probably already got a CD burner.
If less than 650MB of files change in a week, the rest of the CDR can be filled up with files that were on earlier CDRs (this way your backup set can remain finite and you can throw out the earlier CDRs as they become obsolete. Or if you keep them all, you can reconstruct that state of your hard drive at *any* time, not just at the last backup.) This seems ideal to me--why is everyone else talking about expensive solutions like tape drives, DVD-RWs, and second hard drives?
I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!
Since when is a harddrive not a semipermanent media that can be easily taken off site? I'm surprised this comment got modded up so high. And since when are tapes such a reliable media compared to a hard disk? So burn-in the drive for a few days before using it for backups. And use a S.M.A.R.T. utility to diagnose the drive before each backup to reduce the chance that something is getting ready to fail.
Your best option is to put all data on a 2-disk mirrored RAID and use another drive as a removable for an off-site or fire-safe backup. The probability of 3 hard disks failing simultaneously, one not in use, is so incredibly small it's laughable. And for that non-zero chance, if it happens, you can pay to have the spindle of one of the failed drives transferred to a new drive in a clean room.