File Systems Best Suited for Archival Storage?

Amir Ansari asks: "There have been many comparisons between various archival media (hard drive, tape, magneto-optical, CD/DVD, and so on). Of course, the most important characteristics are permanence and portability, but what about the file systems involved? For instance, I routinely archive my data onto an external hard drive: easy to update and mirror, but which file system provides the best combination of reliability, future-proofing, data recovery, and availability across multiple platforms (Linux, OS X, BeOS/Zeta and Windows, in my case)? Open Source best guarantees the future availability of the standard and specification, but are file systems such as ext2 suitable for archival storage? Is journaling important?"

Comments

How Archival?

[Stone Rhino]

Is this going to be relatively live, with data being mirrored onto it regularly, or is this going to be written once and accessed occasionally from then on? If you're only going to write to it a very small portion of the time, (or even WORM), journaling will be useless to you, since anything that takes out your data won't be stopped by it.

How far into the future are you going to need it? I understand the whole "not wanting to become unreadble," but honestly, no one's going to bother re-implementing a filesystem to look at their old vacation photos. Pick a popular filesystem, and you'll be sure of support down the line. FAT's still doing just fine for itself, and the ISO filesystems for CDs and DVDs will be readable as long as people are making drives for them.

All of the data integrity features on filesystems aren't going to protect against disk failure/media wearing out, and error correction on that scale is beyond the scope of any one disk to handle. Like the department jokingly advised, parity files and other methods can handle this in a robust, media-spanning manner, and protect against everything from a few flipped bits to a whole-disk data loss (assuming you have enough parity data).

I think the reason not much talk about filesystems has been going on is because they're mostly irrelevant for this task. They're designed to handle the issues of a live environment; the issues that archives face are beyond the capability of how you choose to store your data on each piece of media to solve.

Re:No Filesystem is Best

[Aladrin]

You'd be MUCH better off creating PAR2 files for the archive set, instead.

If you made 2 copies of the archive on the media, and piece 10 of both sets die, you've lost everything. If you made 1 copy of the archive, and a 10% par set, any 10% of the pieces (data and parity both) could die and you'd still have your data. If you made a 100% par set, you could lose half of the data and parity and still recover. And it doesn't matter which portions.

Add to that the fact that if you lost piece 10 in archive 1, and piece 9 in archive 2, it would be not much fun to figure out the dead pieces and make a full archive again. With PAR2, the tool will do the work for you.