Slashdot Mirror


Offline Storage for Hard Drives?

rrsipov asks: "I work at a small company that processes a good deal of DV (mainly) format video. After trying a number of different technologies we have settled down to using removable hard drives for file storage and backup. When a set of projects are complete, the hard disk they are stored on can be removed and stored offline so that the material is available in for possible future use. The problem is that unlike tapes, etc... we haven't been able to find any good storage cabinet type solutions, and have resorted to a pretty much ad-hoc system of filing the drives. Does Slashdot know of any such system? Ideally we'd like to start with something small, and scale from there if we like the system."

47 comments

  1. Shelf life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the shelf life of an unconnected idle hard drive? Lots of times, mechanical devices don't like to sit unused for long periods, as corrosion can build up or even metal parts can fuse together.

    Just like it is important to excersize bigger bearings occasionally (e.g., trailer wheel bearings can go kaput if left alone for a few years), do hard drives suffer from similar problems?

    1. Re:Shelf life? by pontifier · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've wondered that myself. I have a bunch of drives that for one reason or another I'm not using, but they still have important stuff on them. do I need to spin them up once in a while, or should I just hope that years down the line they still work?

      --
      -John Fenley
    2. Re:Shelf life? by TERdON · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about new drives, but the first computer my parents bought, a 386SX, contained a 50 MB drive. That was pretty small even then, so it got upgraded within a year. After that it didn't get used for like 6-7 years ago until I decided to experiment with approximately two or three years ago...

      --
      I have a really elegant proof for Fermat's last theorem. If this sig was only a bit longer...
    3. Re:Shelf life? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      So you never completed your thought.. Did the old harddrive work like you left it 6 years ago?

    4. Re:Shelf life? by TERdON · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oops, sorry, forgot that. Yes, it worked. But it felt slower than a floppy disk (!). And the storage capacity was already then just a tenth of a CR-RW, cheaply available...

      I still have it anyway. Hopefully I might be able to sell it as an antique or something when I get old... :)

      --
      I have a really elegant proof for Fermat's last theorem. If this sig was only a bit longer...
    5. Re:Shelf life? by jessecurry · · Score: 1

      Perhaps some type of removable disk similar to the EZ-135 of past. It had an actual hard disk platter inside a case, all of the machinery was resident within a drive. It went head to head with the ZIP drive, but ZIP won out.

      --
      Those who know, do not speak. Those who speak, do not know. ~Lao Tzu
  2. Bulk pack boxes by Omega+Hacker · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you're just storing bare drives, try to get ahold of the shipping boxes that manufacturers send 20-packs in. If you're storing that many drives, they're probably going to be the most efficient and safest way to do it. If you're *buying* drives in that quantity, or can consider doing so in the future, you can probably manage to make sure you'll get the box too. You might be able to scam them off of local computer stores too. You could probably glue a laminated sheet of paper to it with a template and [dry|wet]-erase mark what's in each slot on the outside. Make sure you have plenty of good-condition static bags though.

    --
    GStreamer - The only way to stream!
    1. Re:Bulk pack boxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely anti-static bags would be better...

    2. Re:Bulk pack boxes by La+Fortezza · · Score: 1

      I think SAIT or LTO would be a better solution, IMHO. But to answer the OP, this places sells a 20 pack for $40. http://www.wic-store.com/

    3. Re:Bulk pack boxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardigg or similar foam-lined cases would be better.
      None of the other proposed solutions is any good when the sprinkler system fires or when disaster evac is required.

  3. Why not tapes...? by tooth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd re-evaluate tapes... a HDD depends on both the magnet medium and the conected electronics. With a tape, the medium is seperated from the physical components that make it go (The other advantage is that tapes can be read in by anyone to recover data, where as a HDD would need a clean room). Tapes are slower to read data back from, but if the HDDs are stored offline like you are, then this isn't an issue. By the sounds of it, once it's on your offline HDDs you are removing it from your servers. I'd be pretty nervous about that and recomend that you make at least two copies in case one fails. If you want to be serious about you should use an off-site storage facillity, and a comercial storage facility would probably only deal with tapes.

    1. Re:Why not tapes...? by Webmoth · · Score: 1

      I agree about the tapes. You don't have to worry about mechanical failure of the tapes.

      I'd recommend looking into Exabyte's VXA-320 (VXA-3) tapes. They promise 500 writes (as compared to an average of 50 writes with DAT), their "packet technology" provides for error correction and does not depend on a continuous stream of data to efficiently write to tape, and the quality of construction of Exabyte's VXA drives appears to be very high.

      The cost of VXA is very reasonable, especially when compared to technologies like LTO. (With LTO, the cost per gigabyte for the media can be higher than for hard drives.) If reliability is a concern, you're probably comparing to Travan systems, which were just plain evil. (Travail is more like it.) Exabyte claims that you can dunk the tape in coffee, dry it out, and re-read it just fine.

      But I'm not just repeating what's on their website; I have actually used the hardware and like it.

      --
      Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
    2. Re:Why not tapes...? by theJML · · Score: 1

      If I were you I'd seriously recheck tapes. I worked for a decent sized tape backup company for 3 years that also sold hard drive based solutions. By far we had a lower failure rate from tapes than from Hard Drives. Espeically when not in use for a while. We sold a virtual library system that used drives to look like tapes, but, again it was always highly recommnded to offload to physical tape to avoid the problems associated with hard drives.
      Working In tech support gave a "everything is broken" outlook on things, but I always wondered what the benifit of Hard Drive storage was. Sure, Hard drives are fast, but unless you're swapping out an entire RAID worth of disks, they're likely not as fast as some of the tape technologies out today (infact, most of the time someone complained their tape system was slow it was because they couldn't push the data to it fast enough, not because it couldn't write fast enough.

      There are plenty of different ones to chose from now-a-days. Sure some get expensive, but the fact that they can be read by about anyone (if your drive dies, you can get one on E-bay, buy a new one, get one from another company, lease one, or even send the tape to a data recovery place that will load its contents into the media of your choice.) They stay good for a long time (most have archival life for well over 15 years, some say up to 50 years.) They don't have many moving parts (and if the transport mechinism in the tape dies, you can always take the physical tape out of the casette and put it in a working one) They have advanced lossless compression technologies. They are built to deal with bad sectors, they have CRC checking, they have tape striping solutions, they can be completely automated in a library, their capacity per cubic inch outweighs hard drives, they're lighter than hard drives, they're cheaper than hard drives, and their faster than hard drives if you want to pay the money (LTO-2 = 35MB/sec NATIVE with compression I regularly saw speeds over 100MB/sec. LTO-3 is double that) They can be used over and over, and aren't as picky about temperature differences (as long as you don't leave them on your dashboard in the sun). The most important difference in my mind is: Tapes don't break when you drop them! And if the casette breaks, see above.

      I guess it comes down to how long you want them to be good for. If you're cycling through drives every two-three days, then maybe it's not a big deal. If you're going to go for months/years between uses, then I'd go tapes all the way.

      --
      -=JML=-
    3. Re:Why not tapes...? by eric2hill · · Score: 1

      The problem with tape drives isn't really the technology, it's the price. The tape drive you're talking about retails for over $1,000, and you then have to purchase $85 tapes for it.

      If you look on CDW for a 250GB Western Digital hard drive, you'll find them for around $130.

      Taking that into account, you're looking at buying over 50TB of storage capacity before you even come close to breaking even. It just doesn't make sense to go with tape given the cost of disk right now.

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
      LOADING...
      READY.
      RUN
    4. Re:Why not tapes...? by afidel · · Score: 1

      Ok, look at LTO3. Couple grand for the drive then $120/800GB so about 3 times as cheap per GB once you have paid for the drive. Oh yeah, it's actually made for archiving, which HDD's are NOT. Disk which aren't used are almost as likely to fail as those that are used all the time due to problems with the lubricant.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    5. Re:Why not tapes...? by TheLink · · Score: 2, Insightful

      " a HDD depends on both the magnet medium and the conected electronics. With a tape, the medium is seperated from the physical components that make it go"

      Uh, isn't that a significant minus for tapes. Especially since tapes aren't much cheaper than HDDs. And tape drives are very expensive.

      If you've bought an LTO3 tape drive, and LTO4 tapes become cheap, you don't get a free LTO4 drive with each LTO4 tape.

      Whereas if you have been using 250GB SATA drives as backup media, when 400GB SATA drives become cheap, you can switch to using them as backup media.

      I forsee that SATA is more likely to be around and easily available longer than LTO3 will (or whatever tape standard). Look how long PATA and SCSI have been around and compare with DDS3, DDS4 etc.

      So years later, as long as I have a SATA interface, I can still read from an old SATA drive which should have had rather little wear and tear if kept under controlled conditions.

      Whereas LTOx or DDSx tape drives might be quite rare and even more expensive. Even if the HDDs physical stuff seizes up, finding someone who can recover your data from the platters will be not much harder than finding someone with a working DDS4 tape drive.

      Also, if you use HDD as backup media, you can do backups/restores to/from more than one HDD at the same time. Multiple HDDs are much cheaper than multiple tape drives.

      Advantages of using tape:
      You can drop a tape onto a carpeted floor without much worry.

      Tape autoloaders are more common than HDD autoloaders ;). So if you will have massive amounts of offline data, you have to go for tape.

      --
    6. Re:Why not tapes...? by Tripp+Lilley · · Score: 1

      Are you familiar with the phrase "false economy?" That sounds very much like what you might be engaged in...

      The real question is not "how much does storage cost per xB," but, "how much am I willing to risk not being able to recover what I need, when I need it?" That's the risk analysis, and then the cost analysis is "how likely is media failure for medium X, how much would it cost me to recover/reproduce the data stored on medium X, and, if that data was neither recoverable nor reproducable, how badly screwed would I be?"

      It's fundamentally an actuarial problem, and it's how insurance companies make their money. It's also why, if you've done your homework, they'll charge you considerably less in premiums because you've mitigated the risks that they would otherwise have to bear by underwriting you.

      Never think of backup as a "how much does it cost to store it?" problem, but always as a "how much would it cost to lose it?" problem.

    7. Re:Why not tapes...? by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      Electronics can get zapped. I've had hard drives were a chip on the circuit board literally blew a hole out in it. By removing the media from the electronics, you have the ability to use any compatible tape drive with that tape. If the electronics on the hard drive go south, what do you do then? Tapes are also considerably more durable and can survive some bumps and bruises. Hard drives are more shock sensivite, both electronic and vibration.

    8. Re:Why not tapes...? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      By having the drive with the media, you have the ability to use the "media" with any compatible interface. There are magnitudes more computers with SATA/PATA/SCSI interfaces in the world than there are with LTO or DDS drives.

      If you have a physically risky environment then sure tapes are better.

      --
  4. Hotswap bays by Guspaz · · Score: 1

    I'm assuming you're using hotswap bays. That means your drives are in handy little cases with handles and all. Why not just build a special shelf with several hundred little slots shaped for the hotswap cases? Pull a drive from a PC, slide it into a slot.

  5. Hot swap cases by RingDev · · Score: 1

    Get a bundle of plastic hot swap cases(minus the hardware) and put together a cubby hole structure sized to fit them. Easily organized, and the drives will have at least some amount of protection from handling.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  6. Bookshelves. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

    If you've got lots of drives to deal with, pick up a standard adjustable bookshelf at IKEA or something, and buy or make a few extra shelves for it since you don't need as much height. You can stick labels on the shelf edges to keep them sorted.

    1. Re:Bookshelves. by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this was going to be my recomendation too. Back in the days before servers all the video production places I knew of kept their tapes on bookshelves, usually organized by date. There's no reason you couln't store your HDDs the same way. A couple recommendations:

      1) Keep those silver bags the drives come in and put the drives back in them before putting them on the shelf. They protect the drives electronics from damage caused by static electricity (which is a much bigger problem than you probably think), and on a more basic level it'll keep the drive relatively free of dust, which helps keep all your equipment a little bit cleaner and thus working better for longer.

      2) SCSI drives are meant to be stored "on edge", and for long term storage they'll last better if you place them that way. Yeah, I know it makes it more likely that some vibration or shock to the structure (floor, shelf, whatever) will cause it to fall over and possibly break. I suggest maybe somesort of dividers, or maybe bookends to help keep them upright.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  7. The El Cheapo solution by Protectiva · · Score: 1

    If these are hot-swappable drives in cages, then a cardboard box or a milk crate in a cool dry environment should be adequate. You want to avoid dust, so make sure the box or crate is covered. Putting them in a lockable filing cabinet would be a good idea.

    I haven't seen any IKEA-esque prefab shelving meant for HD cages. Of course, if you have the budget for it, many custom furniture contractors will build you a filing cabinet with shelves or pigeon holes that fit the dimensions of the HD cages. Not too expensive.

    If the drives are not in hot-swap cages, then store them in the anti-static bags they came in. If you can afford USB/Firewire enclosures, there are stackable single-HD enclosures and multi-HD enclosures. You'll want to spin the drives up once every few months, so an enclosure is better than anti-static bags.

    Either way, just remember to label all the drives. It's no fun hunting through 50 unlabelled HDs for a particular file.

    --
    It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible.
    1. Re:The El Cheapo solution by dolo724 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Make sure they're protected well from the elements.

      If you pack them in salt, the cured drives could last for several years. A little spice, and the data will have just the right flavor when the drives are finally used.

      The ancient Egyptians used ceremonial drives prepared in special enbalming fluids to accompany their kings on the journey to the afterlife. Little wooden server rooms on the ceremonial boats gave hope to the SysAdmin^H^H^H^H^H^HScribes of everlasting employment. If the drive wieghed more than a feather upon the king's judgement, he would be required to spend time slaving for the BOFH before ascension.

      --
      But you just gotta have another sigarette
  8. Use tape - drives can't just sit there unused by mpechner · · Score: 1

    I agree with the other guys. Disk drives that are unused have a shelf life of about 5 years. The medium does need to be read read once in a while. And yes the electronics can go bad.

    For tapes, the secret is to make and test multiple copies of the tape. I suggest 3. And pay a company that specializes is tape archives to store the tape.

    Make sure you understand how to maintain your tape drive. Mostly make sure you use the cleaning tape to clean the heads on a very regular basis.
    If you can afford it, get 2 drives. Write the data on one and verify the data on another.

    The bigest ememy for tapes is climate. You do not want humidity or temerature to change.

    What is the value of the data? What if there is a disaster and these tapes are required?

    You should have one storage company locally, and another out of state.
    Depending on the number of tapes, you are not talking about a lot of money for storing the tapes.

    1. Re:Use tape - drives can't just sit there unused by OnesAndNoughts · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing there's a fair ammount of data here (?How much?) - if you're worried about a drive dying whilst in storage, archive it to 3 Disks in a RAID 5 (Just one choice of many).

      You could do a periodic spin-up of a volume and check they're still alive, say one volume a week?

    2. Re:Use tape - drives can't just sit there unused by mpechner · · Score: 1

      You now have 3 disks sitting on a shelf.

      Again if there is a multi year retension requirement of this data, then as they finish each project, the raid 5 will wind up being some 6 figure Netapp or EMC to hold all the old projects.

      You still want to do an offsite archive of the data.

  9. Standard 19" racks by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Your greybeard mainframe elders have been dealing with this problem for 50 years.

    http://www.uptime4u.com/media.php
    http://205.234.135.191/v-web/gallery/data_storage/ media_data_ner
    http://205.234.135.191/v-web/gallery/data_storage/ media_data_dasco

    Of course, with all that data sitting in 12' of floor space, a little fire could do a whole lot of damage. Get off-site storage!!!

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  10. Do you have a link? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    "Disk which aren't used are almost as likely to fail as those that are used all the time due to problems with the lubricant."

    Do you have a link to research that shows that is correct?

    1. Re:Do you have a link? by SaDan · · Score: 1

      I don't have a link, but I've witnessed hard drives put into storage for a number of years not spinning up when they were put back into a system for data retrieval. Drives are a semi-complicated piece of equipment, and WILL fail 100% given enough time. They just wear out, or bearings seize from sitting too long.

      Tapes fail too, but it's usually over a much longer timeframe than hard drives. Data stored on tape medium is much more survivable during a mechanical failure than a hard drive.

    2. Re:Do you have a link? by reedk · · Score: 1

      I have seen this too. That's my concern about MAID devices (Massive Array of Idle Disk). Yes, they save on the electrical costs of running large disk farms, but I still worry about spin-ups of long-idle disks.

  11. Stiction? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    Several years ago, hard drives had a problem called stiction. I understood stiction had been completely cured.

    I know of no physical principle which would cause hard drives to stick now. It can be expected that the lubrication will migrate, but that should take decades.

    A good cure for stiction was to rotate the drive quickly back and forth around the spindle axis. The inertia would break the spindle free. I've done that successfully.

    1. Re:Stiction? by SaDan · · Score: 1

      Last time I had drives with frozen bearings was quite a while ago. They were 5-1/4" full-height (stack two CD/DVD-ROM drives on top of each other, about that big) 9GB Seagates, and they'd stick every time you had them powered off for more than a day.

      Took three smacks with a clawhammer right over (or under) the bearing to get them to spin (with power applied of course). Ran like that for the four years I maintained those machines, never had a bad sector. Love to see someone try that with a modern drive. ;-)

      I've had a couple older 1GB era drives that would get fixed by twisting them around with the power applied, so I have done the trick you describe before.

      Drives have bearings, and they will fail. As long as we rely on lubrication, and there's friction, drives will fail mechanically.

    2. Re:Stiction? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      The real cure for stiction was to take the drive out of the machine, set it on a soft surface (like a mousepad) and whack one corner of the drive case with a plastic screwdriver handle in such a way that the drive was rotated (slightly - don't knock it off the table) around the axis of drive rotation.

      If doing it by hand spun it up, it wasn't stiction.

      I actually had one 40MB Seizegate RLL disk that I couldn't even free up by whacking it with a screwdriver. I actually took the cover off the drive, spun the spindle by hand (and with great force!) and then closed it up again, and used it for two more years, finally getting rid of the computer with the drive in it, yet having developed no new read errors. In fact, some of them even went away; this would happen back in the day, due to defects in the oxide layer (this was pre-thin-film) being smoothed/removed by the wind generated by the passage of the platter past the head.

      Of course, I wouldn't try that shit now, on drives where one platter has 20GB+ on it...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  12. Gemtrac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We just installed a number of these Gemtrac units for DLT tape storage. They can be ordered with a variety of different shelves for different storage needs, but are the highest density storage solution that we could find. I'm pretty sure you can get shelves for HDD storage but you'd have to contact Russ Bassett to find out for sure.

    http://www.russbassett.com/filestorage/gemtrac_fil estorage.cfm

  13. Don't keep your drives in bookcases by crowdofone · · Score: 1

    I used to work in a hardware shop with a big, sturdy, shelf of new and second hand drives. One day we had some decoraters come in and ... bang ... they knocked the whole shelf over.

    1. Re:Don't keep your drives in bookcases by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

      Just goes to show.. never decorate.

  14. Unitrends by pnutjam · · Score: 1

    I would take a look at what Unitrends is doing. They have backup systems with a removable Hard Drive component and aluminum cases for thier hard drives. SATA drives I think. You can google them up and talk with a sales guy.

  15. Don't forget the dessicants! by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

    Whatever you do, don't forget to toss a silica-gel pack in your (hopefully) hermetically sealed storage. You wouldn't want moisture to slowly eat your drives, would you?

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    1. Re:Don't forget the dessicants! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Where's the cheap place to buy those things, anyway?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Don't forget the dessicants! by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      I just stop by a local manufacturing place and ask if I can buy some from them. They make money and I don't pay retail rates.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  16. bullshit? by poptones · · Score: 1

    How about a citation? Hard drives are a magnetic storage media. I have cassette tapes that are ten years old and know people who have reel to reel tapes that are five times that old - the music hasn't magically disappeared from those tapes and they've been sitting in paper boxes on bookshelves. Here we have media created in a cleanroom and stored in a sealed chamber and you're saying it "expires" in just a few years?

    I call bullshit. Let's see some objective studies to back up this assertion.

    1. Re:bullshit? by NOPteron · · Score: 1

      For years hard-drives have relied on Partial Response / Maximum Likelyhood
      reading of data from the magnetic "bits"
      ( I think there are 20+ bits with the ECC, for every "byte" given to the outside world,
      but don't know if that's before filesystem or not ), and

      magnetic bits do oppose each other ( or pull each-other ), &
      aren't immutable, & if you've ever tried reading data from old data-tapes
      or old diskettes/floppies, then you know that bit-rot exists.
      ( also lost data in cheap CDRs/DVD-Rs -> use CD-RWs/DVD+RWs
      because they record in metal, not in organic-dye )

      ~magnetic tape has held music without loss for decades~

      bullshit on that, unfortunately. . .

      Remember the bit about ALL the master-tapes in the studios ( except BASF, IIRC )
      having to be dehydrated+transcribed onto other tapes, because they hadn't
      been stored in dry-storage, and the magnetic ~emulsion~ ( or whatever it's called ) on
      the polyester-film had absorbed moisture from the air,
      and so "playing" the reel of tape wiped-OFF the magnetic material?

      Does anyone here consider
      Sounds Like It Did Last Time I Heard It Years Ago == Digitally Identical?
      In the lower frequencies it takes, what, 10% or 20% distortion to be audible?
      Does a 10% loss of one's compressed-archive seem like a recoverable position with no legal liabilities?

      I'd
      1. record on RAID5 or RAID6
      2. fsck annually, just to wake up the drive & check if it's OK
      3. transfer the files from one drive to another ( N archive-drives == N+1 drives needed, therefore ) biannually,
      because then the data'd be "freshly" imprinted in the medium, and so the magnetic bits wouldn't have faded/moved much
      4. make DAMN certain I'm using S.M.A.R.T. on every drive, always, and am actively monitoring the things
      5. get some plastics company, or wasn't there some company with a name like Turtle or something? . . to
      make "toolbox" cases for the things, or get Pellican cases for 'em ( waterproof ) or
      some equivalent aluminum armoured cases for batches of 'em
      6. one can send the freed ( 2yo or 4yo ) drives into the desktops, making everyone happier

      The beauty of this is that one can continue migrating the data onto bigger and bigger drives,
      so the physical storage issues are suppressed
      ( which may be an issue, if one is storing the critical-stuff in a bank safe deposit box ).

      For more information on data-loss in magnetic media, try digging 'round in the pro-audio usenet discussions, over those DATs.
      Also, I hear MiniDV has some issues.
      But for immediate verification, just listen to your own tapes, listening for "pre-echo" in 'em, and
      you've right there definite infidelity to what they recorded originally.
      It's easy to see, when you transcribe your audio-tapes into a sound-editor,
      & can get a reel (: no pun intended ) good look at the accuracy of magnetic recording. . .

      --
      IPTables enhancement Fail2Ban bans cracker-login's
  17. That's the way to free a stuck spindle. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    I agree with the first paragraph, that's the way to free a stuck spindle.

    RLL hard disks! Bad memories.

  18. Use tape by penrose · · Score: 1

    Really, use it. HDD's are really unreliable. They have too many bits that can break, the drive electronics can go bad, which you can sometimes solve by replacing a logic board from another identical HDD, but would you want to? Then there's the disks themselves that can go bad or fail to spin up because they've been lying on a shelf for a long time. Correctly stored tapes can last 30 years and when I say correctly, I mean in a vault of an offsite tape storage company which maintains proper humidity and temperature. I'd use LTO or DLT tapes, as these are the most ubiquitous and the drives tend to have the best build quality. The drive can be a significant investment, but tapes are cheap, I think you can get $22 for 200GB nowadays.