Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: How Do You Manage Your Personal Data?

New submitter multimediavt writes "Ok, here's my problem. I have a lot of personal data! (And, no, it's not pr0n, warez, or anything the MPAA or RIAA would be concerned about.) I am realizing that I need to keep at least one spare drive the same size as my largest drive around in case of failure, or the need to reformat a drive due to corrupt file system issues. In my particular case I have a few external drives ranging in size from 200 GB to 2 TB (none with any more than 15 available), and the 2 TB drive is giving me fits at the moment so I need to move the data off and reformat the drive to see if it's just a file system issue or a component issue. I don't have 1.6 TB of free space anywhere and came to the above realization that an empty spare drive the size of my largest drive was needed. If I had a RAID I would have the same needs should a drive fail for some reason and the file system needed rebuilding. I am hitting a wall, and I am guessing that I am not the only one reaching this conclusion. This is my personal data and it is starting to become unbelievably unruly to deal with as far as data integrity and security are concerned. This problem is only going to get worse, and I'm sorry 'The Cloud' is not an acceptable nor practical solution. Tape for an individual as a backup mechanism is economically not feasible. Blu-ray Disc only holds 50 GB at best case and takes forever to backup any large amount of data, along with a great deal of human intervention in the process. So, as an individual with a large data collection and not a large budget, what do you see as options for now (other than keeping a spare blank drive around), and what do you see down the road that might help us deal with issues like this?"

296 of 414 comments (clear)

  1. Keep a spare blank drive around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you already have the answer

    1. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Informative

      Agreed. I've been gradually rotating larger backup drives in and smaller backup drives out over the last 10 years or so. Right now I have about 2 TB's of unique data in my archive which is kept on the host machine if it is regularly accessed or duplicated on another external hard drive. Everything (I care about) has two copies at all times. As my archive grows, I'm going to have to upgrade my archive device's capacity, but that's a given, no matter what you do, if you want it stored locally, you'll have to add capacity somewhere obviously. DVD-R's and BluRay discs aren't a viable option in my opinion, because I've got a ton of old self-burned discs that I recently had to toss because they were rendered useless from laser rot, even though they were in sealed containers in a cool, dry place.

      The cloud is, to me, not a backup solution. I see it as a way to globally access my data and I use it as such. No sensitive data of mine will go to the cloud because the likelihood of needing access to it without warning is completely nil, so in my case, it's limited to media that I want constant access to. Now, the cloud definitely has the potential to serve as a backup solution, don't get me wrong, but there's just too much uncertainty involved in the cloud these days, especially as concerns the government nuking sites from orbit without warning, whether justified or not.

      However, I agree with some others that are telling you to do some house-cleaning. I recently went through my backups and found 300 GB's worth of crap that I hadn't accessed or used dating back to the early 2000's that I was saving for some stupid reason. Disc Images for ancient games that don't even run well on modern systems (or require a lot of fucking hassle to get running well), music that I haven't listened to in half a decade, old-ass videos that I'd downloaded from the internet back before there was such a thing as youtube, etc. Not to say that everyone's data is as silly as mine was, but it just added up over the years...

    2. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by CapOblivious2010 · · Score: 3, Informative

      This doesn't help much for those of us with crappy internet - I've only got about 300K (bits) upload speed, and at that speed backing up 1TB would take around a year.

      FWIW, my strategy is to keep truly important stuff on a raid enclosure (and backup to other disks periodically), and to just live with the fact that there's really nothing irreplaceable about the rest.

    3. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by erroneus · · Score: 1

      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817707228

      HDDs are kinda cheap. Keep one drive running and from time to time, run off a copy of the storage drive and slap a label with a date on a backup target drive. Do a daily task that checks the health of the HDD... automate it and send anything other than "green/healthy/pass" to yourself in email so you know when it's time to duplicate your main drive to retirement.

      I love those HDD duplicators. They don't care about your OS and make perfect copies. They beep at you when they find bad sectors and stuff like that too.

      I guess it doesn't really answer the original question, but using a HDD instead of an optical disk for backup just makes a lot of sense to me. Capacity isn't going to be a problem and neither is compatibility. Just keep stacking and rotating your backup hard drives. Use something like:

      This -- http://danbeahm.blogspot.com/2010/02/bare-hard-drive-storage.html

      or This -- http://techcrunch.com/2008/09/04/cardboard-hard-drive-storage-box/

    4. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by Jabroney · · Score: 5, Informative

      https://www.googleapis.com/urlshortener/v1/url?shortUrl=http://goo.gl/rIh07 { "kind": "urlshortener#url", "id": "http://goo.gl/rIh07", "longUrl": "http://www.backblaze.com/partner/af3012", "status": "OK" } Trying to sell cloud solutions on Slashdot? You must be new here.

    5. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      I have a Media PC on the TV in the living room, and a desktop, and a laptop. My e-mail is on all three. Most work type documents are on the desktop and the laptop. Bulk media is on the desktop and the Media PC. Total redundancy. (As long as I keep growing the drive space.)

    6. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by xaxa · · Score: 5, Informative

      Link contains a referral ID, so Shikaku is earning from this, but not willing to say so.

      Eventually, it ends up at http://www.backblaze.com/

    7. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by djnanite · · Score: 1

      Agreed 2!

      I buy large disks in pairs these days. One drive sits permanently inside my desktop machine, the other (identical size from same manufacturer) sits in a generic external USB2 enclosure. Backup maybe once a week (using Microsoft SyncToy), and keep the drive with you (in your car, rucksack, draw at work, whatever...).

      That way you get both file redundancy and geographical redundancy. It doesn't matter if your house burnt down (well, it won't matter *that* much...) because all your important (non-replaceable) data is still safe, physically separate from the main desktop.

      Like you, my data allowance is cr*p, and I don't trust online backup solutions. Do it all yourself - it's the only way to be sure.

    8. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by JackDW · · Score: 5, Informative

      Right. Other than buying new disks, there is no good solution.

      The asker seems to be looking for some kind of "join all my small disks together" solution. And yes, he can do this. RAID-0 or LVM. But... don't do it! If even one of those disks fails all the data is effectively gone. The solution is cheap to implement but totally worthless. Sorry, your 250Gb SATA disk now belongs in a museum.

      RAID-5/6 is, IMO, also a bad idea; there are too many instances where the controller has failed or multiple disks have failed.

      The asker explicitly excludes cloud solutions. It's depressing that people have recommended various cloud solutions nonetheless. Apart from not being answers to the question, these solutions are totally awful for large quantities of data. Amazon S3 may be nearly free if you want to store a few gigabytes, but if you want to store a few terabytes you are going to pay through the nose, and all the other service providers are the same. 2Tb would cost $234 per month just for storage, transfer cost not included. For the price of two weeks of S3 storage you can buy a 2Tb external disk. For the price of upload, download and a month's storage, you can buy four or five such disks and have as much redundancy as any normal person could ever need.

      --
      You're an immobile computer, remember?
    9. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by JackDW · · Score: 1

      I could agree with all of that, and indeed I think multiple external/removable HDDs are the most practical backup solution for ordinary people.

      But I think it is better to do the backups from within the OS since the backup software can avoid copying unused parts of the filesystem, and is able to create differential/incremental backups, which is very fast and space-efficient. Disk cloning has the advantage that you can get up and running very quickly - but it is slow, it copies everything, and you can only store a single version of the filesystem.

      --
      You're an immobile computer, remember?
    10. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      I have had good experience with the Thermaltake BlacX USB HD dock. Just plug an HD into it, and it mounts. This way you rotate through more than one backup drive. I run rsync commands to copy (and them incrementally update) the HD swap drives.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    11. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      I've never seen that behaviour and have been using the 2.2 version for over a year. If you saw that, then I suspect you had it misconfigured to contribute instead of mirror or echo. Personally, I find that Echo works the best for backups as any changes I make to the main get duplicated to the backup while changes on the backup, do not get copied to the main as mirror does.

      The really nice thing is that once configured, you can simply run it and get on with the backup. As I'm using Win7, I'm able to backup my user data file (hidden by default) and have excluded the damn temp files and garbage locations such as Flash and various other program settings I don't care about. Part of my use allows me to backup my Mozilla Folder along with copying my email files. I also happen to use it to ensure that changes I make to My Documents actually get backed up properly.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    12. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by chrismcb · · Score: 2

      I use crashplan. They have a service, where they'll send you a 1TB harddrive to seed your backup. Of course this is a problem if you have more then 1TB or you have a LOT of churn.
      Another option is a couple of external drives that you keep at the office or a friends house, or the bank.

    13. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

      The real issue is de-duplication.

      Just keeping the data around is not hard, but expensive. How much of the data is PERSONAL data? Media like movies and songs is pretty easy to replace (for the time being) and if you wanted to back it up, you really only need it once... Something like just putting all your iTunes purchases to a DVD every few months would be enough.

      Personal data is more complicated. There are several parts. "the cloud" works for stuff you are using right now. But what tools are available to collect files from computers, or even better collect files from a bunch of disks?

      Then how do you skim off all the useless downloads, pref files , etc?

    14. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by trolman · · Score: 1

      The asker explicitly excludes cloud solutions. It's depressing that people have recommended various cloud solutions nonetheless. Apart from not being answers to the question, these solutions are totally awful for large quantities of data. Amazon S3 may be nearly free if you want to store a few gigabytes, but if you want to store a few terabytes you are going to pay through the nose, and all the other service providers are the same. 2Tb would cost $234 per month just for storage, transfer cost not included. For the price of two weeks of S3 storage you can buy a 2Tb external disk. For the price of upload, download and a month's storage, you can buy four or five such disks and have as much redundancy as any normal person could ever need.

      What will be depressing is when you loose all of your stuff. It will happen. I wouldn't want to suggest paying a hosting service for risk of depressing you further. So I will leave everyone else with this story.
      Last week someone I know watched the house across the street burn down. According to the story the fire started at 3am with a lightning strike. There was a big hole blown in the roof by the strike. My friend tells me that the couple had time to get out with the dog. They lost everything but their lives.

      If they had put up their important files, photos etc on a hosted site they could get back on their feet much more quickly.

      In the past I have spent thousands on everything from a full blown Netfinity server with raid5 to a big pile of 3.5" disks. Sure you can get a 1TB USB drive, back up your stuff and put it in the fire safe. But it is expensive in time, hardware, and electricity.

      I pay (insert company) $20 bucks a year to host my important stuff, use (a different company) for nightly automated backups, and the rest in on the local hard drive. I am not recommending any particular solution. If you don't have an off site backup that is current you might as well not bother.

    15. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 3, Insightful

      FYI: storing hard disks in a fire-proof safe is not a good idea. Fire-proof safes are generally rated for their ability to protect paper documents from burning up - but paper is very robust, and stable to very high temperatures provided it isn't actually exposed to a source of ignition.

      This isn't really true of a hard disk - you can heat paper to 150 degrees C no problems, but as far as I know most hard disks when in storage may not actually survive prolonged exposure to those sorts of temperatures.

    16. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by JackDW · · Score: 1

      It's depressing that people can be told, in the article, "I'm sorry 'The Cloud' is not an acceptable nor practical solution", and then reply "Hey, why not store your data in the cloud?" And so many replies along those lines, too! At one time this site was full of smart people who had passed their exams. Now it's full of people who don't even read the question. Like I said, depressing.

      The rest of what you say, I don't even know why you are arguing with me. Obviously if you have only a small amount of data, the cloud is a good solution. $20/year is no big deal. The problem comes in when you have a lot of data and it would cost, say, $2400/year to store it on S3. You see the problem? How many fire safes and external drives can you buy for $2400? How many do you actually need in order to have a reasonable chance of keeping your data?

      But I entirely agree that ludicrous RAID5 servers and piles of disks are a silly idea. I know so many stories about people keeping all their data on RAID5 and assuming it is safe. RAID-anything seems to increase the risk of catastrophe, probably because everything is in one basket. And that is the core of the solution: spread the risk. Different disks, made by different companies, stored in different locations. Bit like the cloud, really, except entirely under your control, and without a recurring cost.

      --
      You're an immobile computer, remember?
    17. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1) Find a trusted person you see often or have easy access to (friend, neighbor, relative, coworker, etc).
      2) Each buy enough HDD's to duplicate your stuff
      3) On a regular basis trade drives, update backups, trade back
      4) If you are worried about security (either from them or someone breaking in), encrypt the drive(s) and keep one copy of the key with yourself and another in a safety deposit box (or another friend, etc).

    18. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by egarland · · Score: 1

      I have a linux box setup right now that spins up a few drives once a week to do a backup, then powers them down again when it's done. This is a feature that manufacturers should make into a consumer electronics device configured through a web interface, that sits idle on the network until it's backup time, then reaches out over the network and backs things up that it's configured to. A single drive solution would work for most people. Mine is an 8 drive raid 5 array, but I'm just cool like that.

      --
      set softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4 expandtab nocp worlddomination
    19. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by demon+driver · · Score: 1

      I've never seen that behaviour and have been using the 2.2 version

      So what you have is multiples of the same file with .2.2 and .2.2.2.2.2.2 extensions?

    20. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Back it up to a 1 TB USB drive and store that at your parents' or a friends place.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    21. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by CrazyDawg · · Score: 1

      I do something similar, but more automated.

      I have a bunch of NAS servers setup. None of them run RAID of any type whatsoever. They are all single drive setups.

      All my desktops run SecondCopy (Windows) or rdist (Linux) to a NAS server each day to back up designated files to one of the NAS volumes. They do partial backups every day, and once per week a full backup.

      Then, the NAS server(s) rdist the files to volumes on different physical drive(s) each night. There are dedicated backup drives that are spun down except when receiving the backup.

      This has it's benefits.

      (1) No trying to recover a RAID-anything when a drive fails. I've seen RAID sets logically corrupted due to a bug, etc. I'd rather have the drive fail and have it mirrored somewhere else and simply have to re-mount a filesystem.

      (2) In the case where I hear someone in the other room yell "Oh, crap! I just deleted file YYY, now I'm hosed!" - I can always to one of the servers before the nightly backup and restore the file.

      (3) The backups can also be done on a weekly basis, in a cascaded effect. So, each desktop backs up each 24 hours. Each NAS server duplicates each 24 hours. Each NAS server can also duplicate each 7 days to somewhere else. Ultimate redundancy.

      The only thing this doesn't cover is catastrophic failure of the entire house. Still working on an off-site method for that (I'm thinking to setup a NAS server at my BIL's house and have them sending an encrypted backup automatically to each other weekly.)

      This may seem like overkill, but it's very brain-dead simple to setup and very robust, gets the job done, and my data is not just backed up, but also layered so I get some sort of recoverability for the once in a while user-induced "oops!"

    22. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by briddle · · Score: 1

      There were lots of replies on this subject that talk about keeping backups with friends. That will work in simple cases of data corruption, but it pretty much useless in case of disaster. Just ask the folks along a hundred-mile, continuous stretch of tornado destruction of whole communities in Alabama last year. Or anywhere along hundreds of square miles near the U.S. Gulf Coast when Katrina hit. Or in North Carolina where many different hurricanes hit. Or in California when - not if - the next big earthquake hits. Or in Japan or anywhere near Thailand when their respective tsunamis hit. Etc. If your friend's house is anywhere nearby yours, any disaster that wipes out your house may well also wipe out his. Then, where are you? I strongly vote for instead keeping your backups in a safe-deposit box and in the form of multiple (at least two) fully redundant, slower but cheaper, USB hard drive backups. Modern bank vaults will survive tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, etc . I keep my backup drives in a bank box less than 3 minutes from the house and rotate them on a regular basis. The box costs only around $75 a year. It's also not subject to any black-hat (employee or outsider) gaining access to an online service.

    23. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by arth1 · · Score: 1

      what's the big deal? who CARES if he gets money from a link?

      The deceptiveness is the big deal.

      you people need to get some priorities straight.

      We do. If deceit is how this company wants its "partners" to operate, I'll reward it by blacklisting them, and choosing a more professional partner for my needs.

    24. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by Summitlake · · Score: 1

      I don't have the same volume of data, but I back up about 500gb of more critical stuff to a remote location. I have several machines in two locations. For sensitive personal and financial data I additionally use PGP or securely encrypted Apple Disk Image. Thus I feel I can securely use Dropbox (cloud) for my Quicken files, having the current generation always available wherever I am, but I back Dropbox up too (even though a copy of it resides on every local machine.) I'm going to local net drive storage to reduce redundancy, since I also have the remote copy in another state. Again, with encrypted sensitive data and remote backup, I feel comfortable about the risks of hardware data loss and data theft.

    25. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by ambidextroustech · · Score: 1

      I agree. The cloud is not a backup solution. To subscribe to the cloud for backups would require an internet connection. And this should not be required. My data is my data--period. Access to my data (especially tax, financial and other private information) should be kept confidentially at residence for purposes of knowing who is accessing it. Once your data leaves the premise [to the cloud], there is no 100% certifiable guarantee that the data has been seen by your eyes only.

      It may be an idea for backup in regards to fires, but you can always stash a drive at another location, such as your parent's or friend's house.

    26. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      It may be an idea for backup in regards to fires, but you can always stash a drive at another location, such as your parent's or friend's house.

      My mother is a professional nature photographer and does just that; she's got a safe deposit box where she keeps hard drives of every photo she's ever taken (worth keeping, obviously) in RAW format, as well as the photoshopped digital masters of the prints she sells/publishes. She used to also burn them to DVD-R's for redundancy but her newer cameras are something like 30 MP so that's just not as efficient as it used to be, so now she just keeps redundant hard-drive backups in her house in climate-controlled storage.

      She lives in Alaska, so the cloud isn't a viable option for her given the extremely limited internet speeds up there (she pays almost $100 a month for 768k DSL and that's considered a luxury to most people there, who are mostly on dialup or satellite), but I doubt she would feel comfortable storing her raw photos online, anyway. I think it's going to be a long time before people really trust 3rd party cloud storage for anything really important, and the U.S. government sure isn't doing anything to encourage it with their cowboy bullshit on the net...

    27. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 1

      Kind of off topic, but I have found that by far the best way to get old games to run is to run them in a virtual machine with their original OS installed. I tried really hard to get CIV 2 to run under win7, to no avail. With Vmware, and winxp, the English were happily breaking peace treaties with the Mongols after 20 minutes (installing old OS's from ISOs on a modern machine is really fast).

    28. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      You know, I'll have to try that, I've been itching to play Star Trek: Armada again but I've tried every damn compatibility setting and it works for shit no matter what. Had the same problem with Descent 3 if I remember correctly.

      If I recall correctly, the Civilization box set with Civ I - Civ IV worked on Windows 7, although I've only played Civ II and Civ IV out of the set so far...

    29. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 1

      I still play the original version off my cd that is still kicking from 1996- and it still only supports 8.3 filenames!

        One other nice thing about using a virtual machine is that you can just escape out of the vm and it will save the state of the whole vm. So you can walk away and then come back later to the exact point you left off at, which is especially useful in older games, which tended to have a lot fewer save points.

    30. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      True, I never considered that since where I live we haven't had a natural disaster strong enough to destroy even a single house in over a hundred years.

    31. Re:Keep a spare blank drive around by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      But the VMs don't have GPU aqcceleration, do they? at least they didn't last i looked. That is why I miss the old Win9X box I used to keep for gaming, I could have an old Geforce slapped in there and run all my classic games just fine but i just don't have the room in my apt for another hulking tower and the mini I had finally croaked.

      I have to give MSFT credit though, there are only two of my old games that so far I have found ZERO way to play and that is Mechwarrior 3 and i76. With Mechwarrior 3 anything but win98 and you get this bug where the APCs (which you need on many missions) bounce 1000s of feet in the air so you can't use them, and on i76 there are several in game events tied to the CPU timer so that for example if there is a place where you have to make a jump at a certain time the event will never come and the car will never make the jump. But No One lives Forever 1, Soldier of Fortune 1, and thanks to the GOG versions Blood and Redneck Rampage, all run great on Win 7 X64.

      Sadly it looks like if someone doesn't come up with kick ass Win9X graphics support in the VMs the Win9X era games are gonna be lost. i can run any NT game no problem, DOS games with DOSBox no problem, but the Win9X era games seem to give everyone the most trouble because of all the hacks they used back then to get more speed. I heard that getting Final Fantasy 7 running on anything but a handful of approved hardware is just insanely difficult and a whole bunch of the Win95 games and unplayable now because of all the hacks.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Solution.. buy hard drives! by FrozenFood · · Score: 3, Informative

    1. Buy hard drive from brand A
    2. Buy hard drive from brand B
    3. put in seperate esata enclosures
    4. backup to both drives.

    1. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by Ichoran · · Score: 2

      Exactly. If you can't afford two new drives from different vendors large enough to hold your data, then you cannot afford to keep your data safe.

      Don't bother fiddling with RAIDs unless you have many terabytes of data. Single drives are a lot faster to get and use.

    2. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      My approach is to buy a few drives at a time of exactly the same model. I've had more electronics failures than mechanical failures - this way if a drive fails electronically, I can swap in the board from another drive to get the data off.

    3. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by swalve · · Score: 1

      RAID is nice in that it helps with uptime. A drive failure doesn't mean you have to copy a bunch of stuff all over again. Just reboot, replace and let it resync on its own. It is also really nice to have all your storage in one giant blob of space, even if it isn't multiple TB (beyond the size of a single drive). On the other hand, I am comfortable with how RAID works and I find it easier to manage than a bunch of single drives and various copies. Not everyone might have the same comfort level.

    4. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      blah blah.. I've lost more data to Seagate than any other manufacturer, so maybe you should only buy OCZ.

    5. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by houstonbofh · · Score: 2

      I only buy Western Digital, and avoid Seagate/Maxtor for the same reasons.

    6. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by zonky · · Score: 1

      Is this what counts as a backup? two drives in the same location?

    7. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you're using ZFS, then the best solution is to use RAID-Z for online storage and then have two external disks which you use zfs send / zfs receive to update. This means that catastrophic failure (e.g. a power supply problem blowing all of the drives in the machine) will still leave you able to recover. Ideally, you should store one drive at home and one elsewhere, so that if someone steals your computer then they don't get the data.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    8. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Cos Nobody gets nuked from high orbit!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    9. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      No, but it's not unheard of to have fires break out and they tend to be rather unfriendly to data stored on magnetic media. Or any media for that matter.

      I have a local copy and an offsite copy on another continent. This might seem unreasonable, I know, but having one in a different location is something you should consider, even if you're not located right on top of a major fault in the Earth's crust.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Honestly, it's my Western Digital drives that have lasted the longest. My dad is still rocking several single digit GB capacity WD drives actively in his legacy tower, and I've yet to have one die on me. Not to say I haven't replaced them as their capacity becomes outdated, but I've had much better luck with them than Maxtor (the worst brand I've ever used), which is now a part of Seagate, which I've also had a couple fail on me (but nowhere near as bad as Maxtor).

      I've never used Hitachi or Samsung or any other brand that I know of, so I can't speak as to their quality, but I'm sticking with Western Digital.

    11. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by issicus · · Score: 2

      But how long can you shelf a harddrive and have it still work.. that is the question.

    12. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      I'm starting to think that drive quality comes down to the "batch", not the "brand", but it'd be difficult to try to prove this. every brand has a faulty drive now and then.

      I use samsung drives now and they've been great. (I've had a WD and a seagate fail. both were years ago though - the seagate was 20GB).

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    13. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by Fjandr · · Score: 2

      For my own part, Maxtor, Quantum, and WD drives are the only consumer drives I've had fail on me. Have a dead 1TB caviar green drive on my desk right now. Then again, I haven't had to use any of the Seagate 7200.11s (or was it the 12s?) that had so many problems.

      At least from the perspective of SMART output, the most reliable drives per hour put on them that I've run are Samsung drives, but those have also been a minority of drives I've used.

      That said, I try not to put drives from one single manufacturing batch into the same array if I can help it. That's the one nearly-universal sentiment I've heard from others who deploy massive numbers of drives. In the end, company name doesn't really matter all that much. Failures come in clusters, and all companies suffer from them. If looked at neutrally, I'd guess that Seagate and WD probably run fairly similar failure rates. People tend to go with their experience though, and it's no surprise there are people like you or I who have had better luck with one specific company. The smaller the sample size, the more likely non-trends will appear to be something they're not.

    14. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by d3ac0n · · Score: 2

      Agree with this, mod up.

      Particularly for home users (which TFA seems to indicate is the case here) a simple mirrored RAID array will do the trick. I recommend the following setup:

      Buy 4 2TB drives.

      Put 2 drives in a Mirrored array using motherboard-based RAID.

      Put 1 drive in a USB 2.0, 3.0 or eSATA drive enclosure and back up RAID array to this drive.

      Keep 4th drive as a spare.

      Replace all 4 drives with larger drives as needed and available.

      Done. You will almost never lose data using this method. If you REALLY want to, you can purchase a Carbonite (or Mozy, or whatever) cloud storage backup service and back up your most critical and valuable data to the cloud, or you can simply archive to DVD or BD and store appropriately.

      The only concern I would have for this setup for TFA writer is that he appears to actually be OVER the 2TB level already, which means he's looking at some pretty pricey 3 or 4TB drives. Unfortunately, at this data capacity level the solutions can be technically simple but they are never CHEAP. No matter what, to store that kind of data, TFA writer will be spending close to a grand, regardless of what solution they pursue (Home built RAID with big drives, buying a large NAS, Etc.)

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    15. Re:Solution.. buy hard drives! by ch0rlt0n · · Score: 1

      I've just hit exactly this problem over the weekend where my WS Elements 2TB USB drive has completely failed on me. I _just_ have enough space to create a new backup on an internal drive but I'm getting antsy until its replacement arrives.

      I've only had problems with WD drives but that's because I keep buying them based on the reliability of their WD Passport portable drives. I'm on my third Passport now and never had a problem, but I've had return-to-manufacturer level problems with two WD My Books and now the WD Elements.

      I'd just, independently, come to the same conclusions listed above which is to buy a second equivalent capacity disk from a different manufacturer and alternately cycle the two backup disks.

  3. RAID array on a spare box by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

    I run a RAID5 array on a spare box for backups, totaling 8TB before file system and RAID takes out its chunk. It's only turned on during backups, and is a fairly cheap solution for lots of storage if you look for sales on drives.

    1. Re:RAID array on a spare box by swalve · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's not a bad idea. I started with the OP's problem, trying to keep data from multiple machines in sync and backed up and with enough room to spare. After having spent more weekends copying data back and forth to clear out a drive in order to replace it, I decided to go to the fileserver paradigm. I built a machine with three 40gb drives RAIDed together and made that the only place useful data would be stored. I've since expanded it up to 3tb in various increments, and it has worked well. It has saved tons of time and money by allowing my computers to use whatever cheap harddrive was available and just restore from backup when it went TU. But with the need for increased data availability outside my house (IE, making my notebook my main computer), I'm starting to reverse course and move to your idea. Using robocopy on the clients and shell scripts + hard links on the server, I've set up a workable versioning backup system that doesn't take up too much space.

      I also use Dropbox for some stuff.

    2. Re:RAID array on a spare box by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "I run a RAID5 array on a spare box for backups"

      What will happen when you home burns in fire?

      You'll say at first "I'll have worse things to worry about, then!" but, provided you survive, those "worse things" will eventually be taken care of and then, where's your data?

      Having no disconnected off-site data set is having no backup, just like RAID: better uptime, no disaster recovery.

  4. Digital Diogenes Syndrom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sounds like you have the digital diogenes syndrom. What about you tidy up your room.. i mean, data ?

  5. Enjoy your delusion by Trixter · · Score: 4, Informative

    "I'm sorry 'The Cloud' is not an acceptable nor practical solution." Not sure what brand tin-foil hat you're wearing, but there are cloud backup solutions that encrypt your data *before* it leaves the machine. I use CrashPlan (I can't speak for others) and I've verified the encryption myself by capturing the traffic leaving my machine, even when CrashPlan was backing up to other machines on my own private network. Even the data it writes to locally-attached hard drives is encrypted. So there's at least one company who gets it right.

    1. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's great that you know how fast his connection is and exactly what data restrictions his ISP imposes. I'm actually rather impressed you can be 100% sure his computer is connected to the internet at all. All I know is that if I had that much data, the time it would take to upload would probably be longer than the time it takes for the HDD to wear down and implode.

    2. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes.. Network usage couldn't have been his problem. Or any of the number of other possibilities.

    3. Re:Enjoy your delusion by burisch_research · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're assuming that it's encryption that's the problem. In my case, it's a problem with the size of data vs. how much bandwidth I can use. I get an allocation of 20GB a month, and even that's very expensive. Backing up my 5+ TB to the cloud is simply not an option.

      Cloud is very trendy right now, but that doesn't mean it's a one-size-fits-all.

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    4. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Trixter · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that it's encryption that's the problem. In my case, it's a problem with the size of data vs. how much bandwidth I can use. I get an allocation of 20GB a month, and even that's very expensive. Backing up my 5+ TB to the cloud is simply not an option.

      This doesn't prevent the OP from using local backup in the meantime. I backup to local storage as well as cloud. The local backups complete quickly in case I need to retrieve a file, and the cloud is there for if my house burns down.

      The OP stated in his question that he has a lot of data but no money to buy redundant storage -- well, that's his real problem. If you have 3T of data, buy 3T of backup. I don't know what the OP is looking for other than a magic compression answer or something.

    5. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Trixter · · Score: 1

      How do you know they don't have the decryption keys at the destination?

      Because I'm using my own private key to encrypt the data. Research is your friend: http://support.crashplan.com/doku.php/articles/encryption_key?s%5B%5D=encryption

    6. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're assuming that it's encryption that's the problem. In my case, it's a problem with the size of data vs. how much bandwidth I can use. I get an allocation of 20GB a month, and even that's very expensive. Backing up my 5+ TB to the cloud is simply not an option.

      Cloud is very trendy right now, but that doesn't mean it's a one-size-fits-all.

      Crashplan has an option where they will send you a hard drive to seed your backup locally and mail it back. That way you only have to do incremental backups once you do the initial seed.

      If there's no offsite backup, the whole scheme is worthless. What happens if there is a fire?

    7. Re:Enjoy your delusion by sir-gold · · Score: 1

      "...there's at least one company who gets it right." Until that company goes out of business....

    8. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're assuming that it's encryption that's the problem. In my case, it's a problem with the size of data vs. how much bandwidth I can use. I get an allocation of 20GB a month, and even that's very expensive. Backing up my 5+ TB to the cloud is simply not an option.

      CrashPlan will let you Fedex them a hard drive to get the backup started. From then on, you only need to send deltas.

    9. Re:Enjoy your delusion by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm actually rather impressed you can be 100% sure his computer is connected to the internet at all.

      Well he did post his question to an internet forum...

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In typical "I need IT advice, but I have preconceived notions about how things should work and am not willing to budge on that" fashion, the asker has discounted some reasonable options without specifying the reasons that won't work for him, and failed to provide some super useful info like how large his data actually is, how often it changes, how much existing data changes, how much new data there is, and how quickly it grows.

      So it could be that the reasons for his concern are unmerited, and GP merely points out that if his concern is privacy, there's ways to use the cloud safely. In typical Slashdot fashion, you rebuke the potential shortcomings of the advice without knowing whether those shortcomings actually apply to the asker.

      Backup should be provided in depth, several prongs provides the best redundancy and the least single points of failure. Cloud storage is an excellent option for one of the prongs given certain factors. If most of the data rarely changes (pretty typical for very large data sets), incremental bandwidth usage past the initial storage is usually not much more than the data growth rate. As observed, it can be done in a way that respects privacy and safety.

      Cloud storage has two main advantages over local backup solutions. You won't run out of disk space, and it's off-site (so a house fire won't take out your data set). Any on-site solution automatically fails that level of redundancy. Storage on S3 is ridiculously inexpensive any more.

      I have about 6 TB of data that I need to keep backed up. I have about 12 years of digital photography and video originals, including stuff like wedding and honeymoon photos, as well as the birth and first years of my children's lives. When people suffer house fires, one of the most common and greatest laments are the things that can't be replaced - usually photographs.

      My solution is four tiers. I have a local RAID0 in my Mac Pro. I have Time Machine backups of that (this is hands-down the best consumer on-site backup solution on the market). I rsync those files to a local RAID10 NAS device (Synology are a bit pricy, but they are completely worth it, really excellent built-in software with a lot of features you might find surprisingly useful, and you can purchase expansion bays to extend capacity as you're running low). Then finally I back up to Amazon S3 in encrypted form with JungleDisk (I no longer recommend this software, I own a copy of it from before it was bought by RackSpace, the quality has gone down since RackSpace bought it and "improved" it, plus I gather you now have to pay a monthly subscription, AND pay for your own storage - crap).

      The only way my data is in jeopardy is if my house burns down (takes out 3 local redundancy & backup solutions) on the same day that Amazon has critical failure. And it's all 100% automated, Raid0 happens at time of write, TimeMachine alerts me if there's problems creating a backup and gives me local history, my NAS warns me by email & SMS if it so much as writes too slowly (my rsync cron script emails me if it can't reach the NAS for some reason), and JungleDisk does a nightly sync with S3, and sends me weekly reports so I can be sure that it's doing its job. I have quick local access, and slow offsite access if everything else fails (I'd probably go bum my work's huge pipe to do the initial restore if I had to rely on that).

    11. Re:Enjoy your delusion by FridayBob · · Score: 1

      "... there are cloud backup solutions that encrypt your data *before* it leaves the machine. ..."

      That's nice, but there are some other issues. First, a major one: he has too much data for that -- it seems to be measured in terabytes. Since he's complaining that blue-ray is too slow, his upload speed will likely make backups up to the cloud an impractical solution also.

      Second, there are some minor issues: cost and reliability. Even if he has plenty of upload bandwidth, having some cloud service hold on to that much data for you is not going to be cheaper than buying the extra hard drives yourself. After all, how can their storage space be so much cheaper than yours? As for reliability, if Amazon can make mistakes and lose your data than others can too. Of course, they will tell you afterwards to make backups of your data (which are your backups) to store it in their various data centers, but that only makes it all more expensive.

      Therefore I've concluded that it's still better to do it all yourself. It's cheaper and you have more control.

    12. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 3, Funny

      Have you actually tried to backup 1TB using IP over avian carrier?

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    13. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Amazon LOST DATA. It matters not one whit how encrypted it is when they LOSE the data. Try getting 10 terabytes of data to the cloud on a standard home link. Try paying amazon for that amount of data, hell get them to quote a price that isn't a moving target. I have that much data on my drives just from regression testing open source projects in virtual machines.

      The only solution I've found is to have the data I cannot lose stored off premises at three locations, no not the damned 'cloud' a physical server in a data center. I have my local servers for about 20TB. For critical personal stuff which is small I have it encrypted and split up int chunks where I need to fetch a few to be able to decrypt.

      Shamir secret sharing.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir's_Secret_Sharing

    14. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Richard_J_N · · Score: 1

      Actually, even then, you might be OK if you use rsync. Rsync will allow you to do daily incremental backups with very little overhead. Of course, you still have to handle getting the first (full) backup made, and the cost of a full download if you need to recover. But that's not nearly as bad (and I believe there are some services will let you physically deliver a disk for initialisation).

    15. Re:Enjoy your delusion by rvw · · Score: 1

      How do you know they don't have the decryption keys at the destination?

      Because I'm using my own private key to encrypt the data. Research is your friend: http://support.crashplan.com/doku.php/articles/encryption_key?s%5B%5D=encryption

      There's no guarantee that the key is not uploaded at some point. It's less than 1kb in size.

    16. Re:Enjoy your delusion by PNutts · · Score: 1

      I don't know why you get all the hate. To repeat what others have already said, OP eliminated all common options. An unlimited number of disks in one location are a fire or flood or theft or whatever from being gone. I used to back up to a DVD and left a copy at work. Then it became more than a DVD and I stopped. Now I have about 100GB at Carbonite with a complete local copy at home. A true cloud backup like Carbonite or Mozy allows you to pick and choose what you backup up (prioritize) and will also throttle bandwidth (and you can turn it off when you chew through too much of your cap). Personally I bought a USB 3 2TB drive for swapping.

      Either it's important enough to save with possibly some pain or you're willing to lose it. I also agree that if you can't be bothered to swap a disk at 50GB intervals then you're not serious about it.

    17. Re:Enjoy your delusion by danbob999 · · Score: 1

      uploading 2TB of stuff is not convenient at all, not matter if it is encrypted or not.

    18. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My solution is four tiers. I have a local RAID0 in my Mac Pro. ...

      You do understand what RAID0 is, right? RAID0 is strictly for performance and offers zero data redundancy or failure protection. In fact, since you need both disks to function to read your data - you're essentially halving the MTBF of using one disk. Perhaps you meant RAID1? (a mirrored set)

    19. Re:Enjoy your delusion by BlackPignouf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have Time Machine backups of that (this is hands-down the best consumer on-site backup solution on the market).

      Did you actually use it for recovery?

      Both my rotated TimeMachines were corrupt. They never complained during backups, but failed miserably while trying to recover my Pictures HDD.
      Only some of the backup files were corrupt, but when you try to recover a complete disk with TM, it's all or nothing, and the process stops after the first error, leaving you in the dust.
      I had to write a parsing script with ruby, "cp -avX", ditto and chmod in order to get my system back.
      It wasn't so hard, but it sure was stressful with one disk down, two corrupt disks and no other backup to get my pictures back.

      BTW, TimeMachine doesn't backup every file in your system, and is too stupid to realize that it should not begin from scratch after recovery : it needs twice the storage after that, because it thinks every file is new.

      My drives weren't big enough, so I had to wipe the backups and lose the local history.

      Fuck it. I began using Carbon Copy Cloner since then, and never looked back.
      It's free as in donationware, it works, it gives you a bootable backup that you can actually test and rotate properly, it can easily be automated, it archives the files that you've deleted between backups, and uses much less space than TimeMachine.
      I hear SuperDuper is just as good.
      TimeMachine is some crappy software with nice looking interface that gives you a false sense of security.

    20. Re:Enjoy your delusion by cheetah · · Score: 3, Informative

      S3 storage for 5TB isn't what I would call cheap. We are talking about $580/Month(or almost $7k per year). For that amount of money, you could buy a new set of 5TB worth of hard drives each month and then ship them to a remote location and pocket about $200 a month in savings.

      Not a perfect solution(no online access) but I think it underscores just how costly S3 still is for large amounts of data. If you are talking about a few hundred GB of data, S3 storage is cheaper(and better) than anything you could reasonably do yourself. But once you scale up the usage... Heck, you could buy and colo a remote server and ship drives back and forth for less than what S3 would cost...

    21. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Trogre · · Score: 1

      +5 for pimping The Cloud, even after it's been explicitly ruled out?

      *shakes head*

      Perhaps you have a 2Gbps Internet connection with no data cap and no privacy concerns, but some of us are not so privileged.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    22. Re:Enjoy your delusion by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      What part of 1.6 TB of data I have to move to reformat a drive didn't you understand? I would like to be able to do that without crippling my only home computer and my only network connection for approximately 883.75 years with my current upload speed. The issue is more than privacy, which is only one of the myriad issues I have with Internet based storage services. We will not have that discussion here, as it would require another thread and you thinking the whole concept through, which might take longer than my upload!

    23. Re:Enjoy your delusion by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      Ok, again, I am not talking about backup. I am talking about doing drive maintenance and the need to move 1.6 TB of data to something else. Is my only option to buy another hard drive that sits dead on a shelf for when I need to do this? And my second question was how do you deal with your ever growing storage needs and whether you see something on the horizon that might make things easier. Also, must be nice to have a fat job so you can afford all that at home, but what about the less fortunate for whom their data is just as vast and important to them. Too bad your solution only works for people making more than $75,000/year while being single.

    24. Re:Enjoy your delusion by way2trivial · · Score: 2

      http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/03/32gb-microsd-card/

      weight of a micro sd card :~ .5 grams

      capacity of a micro sd card:~ 64 gb
      http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Mobile-MicroSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B005V7WIA2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332714352&sr=8-1

      MATH:~ 1000/64 = 15.6 or 16 cards
      https://www.google.com/search?q=1000%2F64&btnG=Search

      16 cards weighs 8 grams grams

      Capacity of a pigeon:~ 38 grams
      http://interbug.com/pigeon/technology/homing_pigeon_with_gps.pdf
      "Thirty-eight grams total is still a lot for a pigeon to carry, representing about ten percent of its body weight."

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    25. Re:Enjoy your delusion by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      and you bitch because the OP has stated that the cloud is not an option. Why they stated that was not explained but if a Sales person told me that their cloud solution was the only offering they had, I'd be showing them the door with the caveat "Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out" just as I'm telling you that your rant is just that. If you aint got advice within the restrictions they stated, then don't bother coming to the party as what you have to say is simply wasted hot air.

      In my case, I find that DVDR's are still a viable option for backup reasons. Of course I don't purchase them in 1-5 packs but 100 pack spindles. You did correctly state that most large data sets don't change once created, it's just the initial creation that takes time/bandwidth. For the OP, I'd actually look into using DVDR for medium term storage Don't buy the cheapest disks - they fail quite often Verbatim is what I use even though a bit more expensive - quality pays for itself. You'll need to make at least 3 copies when you backup. 1 for local and 2 for off-site and label the damn things with a 3year expireation date. Saves you from discovering bit-rot has destroyed the backup. It can be a PITA but it does buy enough time to begin deciding what you actually need to keep and what can be allowed to disapear.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    26. Re:Enjoy your delusion by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      1)Set up a server at one of your trusted tin-foil-hat club-for-men fellow members home and use a program that will encrypt and auto back up the data?

      2)Use a safety deposit box and multiple encrypted terabyte drives?

      At some point, if you want your data to be resilient against an event that can wipe out your local copies, you need to put that data out of your site and physical location.

    27. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Centurix · · Score: 2

      Put them all in a coconut and you could transport them by swallow.

      --
      Task Mangler
    28. Re:Enjoy your delusion by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      thus the reason to have multiple backups.

    29. Re:Enjoy your delusion by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      then use their disk seeding option for a little extra up front.

    30. Re:Enjoy your delusion by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      anything that you need absolute privacy for, set up your own encryption before marking it for backup. Not all your data could require paranoid levels of privacy could it?

    31. Re:Enjoy your delusion by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      You aren't doing a proper backup if the data stays with you. Of course if something happens to you, perhaps you no longer care about your data.
      To protect your backup properly you have to trust someone. Whether that is the lock box at the local bank, or your friends bedroom closet. You should be storing your backup somewhere else.
      Someone asked for recommendations on how to backup his data. And you are surprised when people gave him an answer?

    32. Re:Enjoy your delusion by danbob999 · · Score: 1

      If you have 2TB of static data that never changes and that you never need to download that might be a practical solution.

    33. Re:Enjoy your delusion by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      Never understimate the bandwith of a station wagon full off... pigeons?

    34. Re:Enjoy your delusion by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "To protect your backup properly you have to trust someone"

      You may need the help of someone but certainly you don't need to trust him.

      Cypher your backups if you don't want them accessed by someone else and test them from time to time if you don't want to discover too late someone have been playing with them.

    35. Re:Enjoy your delusion by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      "Until that company goes out of business"

      So what? It is not live data but one for backup purposes. If the company goes out of business you look for another one, no data is lost in the meantime.

    36. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Ghjnut · · Score: 1

      He said he had RAID0 on his Mac. Since this is his lowest level device, he would be looking for the highest performance while allowing for the best disk space utilization. He backs it up regularly with Timemachine which provides his backup needs and since it is run so often, his only worry is that it hasn't run in the near past. His most data-safe level is a RAID10 set up which is a mirrored and striped setup providing write performance and strong redundancy.

      --
      MouseClass extends ScrollClass, which extends TabClass, which extends SidebarClass, which extends PowerClass, w
    37. Re:Enjoy your delusion by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      why does it have to be static?

      1) Off site backup is for disasters, not working files or even a quick recovery backup...that is what local copies are for.
      2) Data does not have to be static for it to be seeded. Crash Plan will send you the size disk you need for your seed. It will deal with Diffs from then on.
      3) if you turn over 2 TBs of data so quickly that you can't even do a Diff backup after a seed because it would be equivalent to a full back up of most or all your data, then you need a more enterprise solution for your work than something like Crash Plan.

    38. Re:Enjoy your delusion by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      What about if the cloud operator goes bankrupt? Or is purchased by another company that decides this service is worthless? Or is taken down by some legal action?

    39. Re:Enjoy your delusion by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      Given the constraints of data locality, I really do not understand why more ISPs haven't offered data backup solutions!?!?!

      ISPs typically have fat, beefy connections between your computer and their network, but then have to pay dearly for their connection to the general Internet. Why allow some "cloud company" to use their expensive connection to back up TB of data, when they could both eliminate the data transfer expense and charge the client for off site backups?

      Strangely, this hasn't happened. (shrug)

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    40. Re:Enjoy your delusion by aiht · · Score: 1

      anything that you need absolute privacy for, set up your own encryption before marking it for backup. Not all your data could require paranoid levels of privacy could it?

      What part of "approximately 883.75 years" did you not grasp?

    41. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Nevynxxx · · Score: 1

      Except that Crashplan will post you out a drive, for you to do a backup to, post back to them, and import into the datacenter..... Same for recovery if you really need it.

    42. Re:Enjoy your delusion by chiph · · Score: 1

      The good thing about Time Machine is that the OS installer will recognize it's backup volume and allow you to do a full restore without first having to wait for the whole OS X to be installed.

      Oh, and I agree - TM is a consumer-grade backup solution, and will sometimes fail silently.

    43. Re:Enjoy your delusion by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      With a bootable clone done with CCC or SuperDuper, you don't have to install anything. The backup is already a complete working system.
      You simply need to boot with the backup drive after powering your Mac OS.
      It literally takes 5 second to get your system working again after a catastrophic disk failure.
      CCC is already installed on your backup drive, so you can resume your backup routine.

      Also, TimeMachine has a weird structure with fake hardlinks and wrong inodes, so you cannot parse the directory structure under Linux.

    44. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      African or European?

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    45. Re:Enjoy your delusion by noesckey · · Score: 1

      Will CrashPlan (or any cloud solution) Fedex a hard drive to you containing your data if you need to restore terabytes of data?

    46. Re:Enjoy your delusion by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      Seed your backup using a hard drive shipped to them then.

      They can maintain differentials which are orders of magnitude smaller and then if disaster strikes, you can even have them send you a disk with your data on it.

    47. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      I have about 6 TB of data that I need to keep backed up.

      The only way my data is in jeopardy is if my house burns down (takes out 3 local redundancy & backup solutions) on the same day that Amazon has critical failure.

      Are you sure of this? With my Internet connection, a full restore of 6TB of data would take somewhat over five years, which is a pretty big window for an Amazon failure.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    48. Re:Enjoy your delusion by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      "Gulp." (That's me drinking the nano-SIMs out of that coconut. Now, I'm left with two empty 'alves, to bang together of course.)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  6. Bare Drives and a USB Drive Dock? by wanderfowl · · Score: 5, Informative

    One way to save a bit of cash is to buy a USB eSATA drive dock (single or double) with some bare eSATA drives. This cuts the enclosure out, and allows you to buy bare drives, which are often cheaper than enclosed drives.

    You could also consider Drobo or one of the Wiebetech multi-drive RAID containers. But encryption + cloud isn't all bad.

    1. Re:Bare Drives and a USB Drive Dock? by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      I've talked to a few people that bought Drobos and they love them. A plus is not having to have identical drives in every bay, so you can just swap out with larger drives as needed.

    2. Re:Bare Drives and a USB Drive Dock? by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      With multi-TB drive arrays I can't in good conscience recommend anything without resilvering or data-scrubbing. Drobos don't have this so eventually you're going to get some bit-rot. I'm waiting for HD prices to come down a bit to migrate my Drobo files onto a FreeNAS with ZFS.

      I've already lost a movie in the drobo due to random changes, fortunately I gave a copy to a friend years ago and he still had it.

      Who knows what else is rotting away? Old family photos I haven't looked through in years? A song that once sounded fine but now has clicks?

      It's an issue more people need to be aware of.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  7. Budget by macemoneta · · Score: 4, Informative

    "large data collection and not a large budget"

    This is your problem right there. You can't enter into a a situation like this without planning a budget for the inevitable failures. I suggest purchasing a new larger drive (3TB are common now) and migrating the data from the problematic drive. Then migrate the data from several older smaller drives. This will reduce the component count (points of failure), save you power (cost in the long run) and keep you ahead of failures. You should plan on doing this periodically to maintain the integrity of the data.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    1. Re:Budget by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 1

      And don't forget nightly incremental backups..

    2. Re:Budget by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The old smaller drives could go in a dedicated NAS box using software RAID. Doesn't have to be on all the time, just for periodic backups.

      Look into MultiPAR for redundancy for your most important stuff too.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Budget by nine-times · · Score: 2

      Yeah, in my view, there's a simple time-tested method for managing your data: Get a centralized storage medium big enough to hold it all, move everything to it, and then back that up. Your backup medium should be at least twice as big as your storage medium-- for example, if you have a 2TB drive that you're storing everything on, you should have a backup device that can hold at least 4TB.

      But it seems like he's saying, "I want to store everything and back it up, but I'm unwilling to pay for the storage media. Does anyone have a solution where I get things for free?"

    4. Re:Budget by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Yup, I use cloud backup (homebrew solution), and while I have TB of stuff, I only back up the stuff I really need. If I lose TV episodes on my DVR I'll live, but I don't want to lose documents/records/etc. Configuration settings are also useful to backup - /etc, and such. The goods thing is that most of the really essential stuff is very compact - I cast a bit wider net and only backup a few GB (daily incrementals, and so on).

      If you can't afford to back it up properly, then plan to live without it. Technology breaks...

    5. Re:Budget by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      100% agree with this. If you have the money now, get 3 3TB drives. One internal on your main computer, and 2 external. get all three synced with your data. Then put one of the external drives in a friend's/parent's house. A few times a year resync all the drives. (bonus points if you're using rsync over ssh over the internet to get to the drive in your friend's/parent's house.)

      And here's the important part: Throw away all the old drives.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    6. Re:Budget by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      The problem is file system related, not a bad drive. Just needs reformatting. I said all this in the OP. also asked if a spare drive empty as big as my largest drive was the only option. Been doing that for years, was wondering about other options, if any, and how you deal with your data.

    7. Re:Budget by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      why throw them away? Just do a drive wipe using a random bit write.

  8. Buddy NAS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have a solution I call the "Buddy NAS". Go out and get two cheap computers. It could be a PC or a mini-NAS or a low-end server. Anything that will hold multiple hard drives. You jam both full of hard disks and use them as a backup/NAS server. One PC is kept at your place, the other at your friend's house.

    Both computers have an account for you and an account for your friend (it helps if your friend is nerdy and "gets" backup solutions). Both of you now have a backup solution in your own home and a remote backup server at a friend's place. Two copies of your data, one remote. Basically it's like having local and cloud storage for you and your friend and it'll cost less than a grand if you shop around. If neither of you have static IPs you can use dyndns.org to connect to the remote boxes. Bandwidth shouldn't be an issue if you use rsync to backup changed files nightly.

    1. Re:Buddy NAS by toygeek · · Score: 1

      I wish I could mod that up, its actually a pretty decent solution with lots of potential for win.

    2. Re:Buddy NAS by Teun · · Score: 1
      An excellent solution for those with enough bandwidth.

      I see one little problem, these computers are Always On' and will fail sooner than a disk that's connected once a day or once a week.

      That's why I have two large HD's, one at home and one at the GF's place, we rotated them about once a moth.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  9. One spare isn't enough by Freddybear · · Score: 1

    I have invested in USB backup drives of about the same total capacity as my primary storage drives. Yes, that's a lot of hard drive space for backups, but it's really the only practical solution that I have found. Just think of it as the cost of not losing all that data to the inevitable drive failure.

    An external eSATA drive dock and a stack of 2TB drives might be a somewhat better way to go about it, at least backups and restores would be faster than the USB drives.

    1. Re:One spare isn't enough by sir-gold · · Score: 1

      One of my friends uses the stack-of-drives method, he stores the spare HDs in their original packaging for protection

  10. Here's a couple of solutions by jchawk · · Score: 2

    I can offer a couple of suggestions... What I did was buy a used Dell Poweredge 2950 on eBay for about $500 bucks shipped and I added 4 x 1tb SATA drives to it and I run a raid 5 setup with 3tb of usable space across the four 1tb drives. This solution cost me less then $1000 and I have a nice playground to experiment with VMWare ESXi.

    I know that's not exactly budget conscience but it works great for me.

    If I were on a tight budget I would just buy a 2tb USB drive from Newegg or somewhere similar. It looks like you can buy a name brand for about $130 bucks.

    If you have a little bit more money to spend you could always buy a couple of 2tb internal SATA drives and run RAID-1 mirroring on them. You could put these into an old computer and make a little NAS linux server...

    If you're saying you have no money to spend then maybe you need to consider cleaning up your data. Often times all those "personal files" that you think you need to keep... Really aren't required. Just my 2 cents but this problem is very solvable.

    1. Re:Here's a couple of solutions by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 1

      Where do you keep that sucker? Those 2950's have extremely loud fans in them, and they generate a good deal of heat. Do you have an air-conditioned, sound-proofed closet?

    2. Re:Here's a couple of solutions by cmdrbuzz · · Score: 1

      Loud... I have an HP Itanium rx2660 which as my boyfriend and I now live in a flat, is in our bedroom... Its crazy loud, and can barely hear the Dell 2950 and T620 over it!

      Yes, I do have the most understanding boyfriend ever!

    3. Re:Here's a couple of solutions by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      how about using a few of the HP Proliant Micro servers? on special they sell for 180 bucks.

    4. Re:Here's a couple of solutions by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      Get the Proliant Micro server. 23 db of sound.

    5. Re:Here's a couple of solutions by jchawk · · Score: 1

      You are certainly right about the noise! It lives in the basement in a rack. Since the basement is only semi-finished we're never down there so it works out well.

  11. I delete stuff by Amiga500_Rulez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously. How much crap do you really need to keep around?

    1. Re:I delete stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Grow up. Families takes a lot of photos and video of kids and events, that's now digital. Just because you're a pr0n pirate, doesn't mean everyone else doesn't generated TBs of their own content for their own consumption.

    2. Re:I delete stuff by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      True... but in the experience of my own family, none of it ever gets looked at. It just becomes data you are obliged to keep safe forever even though no-one really cares to access it.

    3. Re:I delete stuff by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      so give everyone a usb storage box for christmas/chanukah/eid/whatver, every now and then "tank them up" with the latest videos and photos.

    4. Re:I delete stuff by karnal · · Score: 1

      My DVR points to the local share that houses every digital picture me and my wife have ever taken. We probably started keeping them just before 2000 and have >10GB, and we don't even have kids yet. Some nights when we sit down after dinner, we'll turn on the TV and not actually watch tv - but just watch the pictures go by. My DVR just cycles through pictures at random for it's "screen saver". Brings up a lot of "remember that?" moments.

      --
      Karnal
    5. Re:I delete stuff by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      I do audio and video production work, along with web and graphics work. Can't delete it. I have to keep it as a lot of it is already archive stuff. That's what the drive is for...

    6. Re:I delete stuff by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      When you create stuff, you want to keep it forever. Pictures and movies are large nowadays. Sure I can go through my pictures and delete a bunch that I don't want. But if any of them are of my kids, they aren't getting deleted... EVER.

  12. Obligatory FreeNAS comment... by UncleRage · · Score: 1

    Cheapo used market PC, invest in some large drives and a couple of drive docks, install FreeNAS.

    Take a weekend to organize your data however it makes sense (by year, subject, file type, whatever), and store it on a particular drive. Rinse wash and repeat. Depending on how important the data is, store in a fireproof safe onsite, or offsite. When (read: if) you need the data again, dock the drive and retrieve.

    Personally, I'm about to liberate myself from years of data. I'm tired of all these bloody drives and the annual, "I really want to look at _______ again". It's amazing how much of that crap has zero personal value anymore. (This isn't a comment on your data, but mine.)

    --
    #SickNotWeak
    1. Re:Obligatory FreeNAS comment... by wrathpwn · · Score: 1

      FreeNAS also comes with rsync, making it easy to do regular differential backups from almost any platform. I use rsync on FreeNAS and QtdSync with my Windows 7 machine to do nightly backups. It works automatically (and fast) so I don't have to worry about the safety of my user files in case my main hard drive fails completely.

  13. two maxims by tchdab1 · · Score: 1

    One, you can't have enough backup images as something always seems to go wrong. Should include at least one offline unplugged "safe" unit. I know, it's a hassle to keep them up to date.
    Two, the longer you wait the less all this backup space costs, so don't buy too much too soon.

  14. Magic by lucm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So your disks are full and possibly broken. You don't want to have more disks, you don't want tape or optical medias, and a storage provider (aka The Cloud) is not an option... Then you have three solutions "down the road":

    1) Delete stuff
    2) Invent a new compression algorithm that will allow you to reuse the same disks forever without losing data
    3) Rely on magic*

    *might overlap with solution #2

    --
    lucm, indeed.
    1. Re:Magic by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
      Close ...

      1. data deduplication. Most people have a lot of redundancy ever since hard drives started growing past a few gigabytes.
      2. for photos - people might have 20, 30 shots, of which only 2 or 3 are really "keepers." Get rid of the crapola. Same goes for videos that are "better off forgotten" or that, while still viewable, wuld be a pain to watch because we no longer can stand looking at 320x200.
      3. tar lots of little files into one big file, so as to not lose disk space to 4k sectors holding a 330-byte file, etc.,
      4. bzip2 (much better compression than gzip) for most stuff, re-encode to h.264 for videos.
      5. be amazed at how much space you've freed up.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    2. Re:Magic by lucm · · Score: 1

      Inline deduplication is extremely expensive so it's not an option for this guy, and offline deduplication (and its small cousin, compression) requires to have enough room on the disk, which appears not to be the case based on the post - which is why I recommend a new compression algorithm.

      As for collating files that are under 4k - I don't know what kind of activity would create a huge volume of such files... unless this guy is actually Twitter! That would explain it and also explain why he can't afford new disks.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    3. Re:Magic by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      6. be amazed at how quick you manage to find other crap to fill your disk(s) up with again.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:Magic by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      Not broken! The file system is just a little wonky. Something a reformat will fix. I know what the problem is and how to fix it. It's not that I don't want more disks, it just seems like a regrettable necessity to have a drive as big as my largest sitting around empty should I need to do these types of tasks. That gets expensive when you upgrade having to buy two drives all the time. Thanks for posting.

    5. Re:Magic by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      6. be amazed at how quick you manage to find other crap to fill your disk(s) up with again.

      Absolutely true. I remember how we used to save space by only uncompressing applications as needed, then deleting the uncompressed version. All of a sudden, the drives had 30% more space ... but not for long :-(

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
  15. Data compression... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    It depends on the data, but many formats compress really well when using WinRAR. Many of my files, for example, that reach nearly 10:1 compression. Unless we are in the same profession, I wouldn't set your expectations that high, but I imagine on average you could get your data usage down to 40%. If I'm right, maybe you could winRAR several folders from the failing drive to the smaller drives, and not necessarily need to get more space available.

    That said, I really do think the suggestion of buying another drive is spot on. I saw a 2 terrabyte drive for $120 at Best Buy yesterday.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    1. Re:Data compression... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I went the compression route myself. It was effective. Then it became more than effective: It became fun!

      Now I spend many an evening studying and devising new means of compression by which I may squeeze a tiny bit more useful information into those bits. I'm good at it, too.

      Also... in my very extensive testing experience, though winrar beats zip with ease, the contest is close between rar and 7z on small files - and once the files get big, the advantage of 7zs -md=256m dictionary size gives it a clear edge. 7z beats winrar.

      I've got a block-deduper program I wrote myself too that works miracles on full-drive backups and virtual machines, but it takes a very long time to run, rendering it rather impractical. Some day I'll rewrite the slowest part to use quicksort rather than a radix sort, then it'll be much faster.

    2. Re:Data compression... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I just wanted to say your post was helpful, thank you. :)

      Have a good week.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  16. Redundancy and Archiving. by Leareth · · Score: 2

    As several people have said you already answered the question yourself. Spare HDD + Blueray.

    You can achieve what you want by also changing the way you think about your data.

    How much of your personal data is live? As in, how much of it do you access constantly, and need immediate access to?

    Here's what I do, I have discrete HDD set up for each data type (not needed...but I had spare ~500gb drives so it's how I did it) There are broken down to Music, Projects, Video, and Photos. Each of them is synced monthly to a 2TB external drive that is spun up only to do a differential backup.

    Data that I haven't accessed in 6 months (mostly phots and old closed projects) is moved to Archival grade DVD and removed from the Archival HDD.

    So irreplaceable things (3 decades of photos, years of work) are stored and can be accessed within a few moments, less important but commonly accessed stuff (music and instructional videos, or documents I use every day) are live and backed up on the Archive.

    --
    *A)bort, R)etry, I)nfluence with large hammer.*
  17. What kind of data? by rainer_d · · Score: 1
    There is a solution for the problem of "too much data": it's called "retention".
    You must give up some of it, or transfer it to some other, long-lived medium.

    Otherwhise, I suggest you face reality and invest accordingly

    --
    Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
  18. Drobo + BackBlaze = Win! by mveloso · · Score: 3

    Drobo -> mostly reliable local backup
    BackBlaze -> mostly reliable offsite backup

    You might want to substitute a ZFS-based FreeNAS for the Drobo, if you're so inclined. It's less automatic, but seems just as reliable.

    1. Re:Drobo + BackBlaze = Win! by bhsx · · Score: 1

      How do you feel Drobo compares to Synology? I would have suggested a DS212j since he's on a budget. Any thoughts?

      --
      put the what in the where?
  19. Depends what you mean by "personal" data by msobkow · · Score: 1

    All of my personal data is in my home directory and easily backed up to non-volatile media (which I do a few times a year, but not as often as I should.)

    All of the project data is on SourceForge or company project servers, so there are duplicate copies of that.

    I hardly think of my music or movies as "personal" data nor as irreplaceable. Were I still playing video games, I don't think I'd bother backing up game data, either.

    When people talk about needing entire drives for their personal data backups, I have to wonder: WTF have you got ON there?

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Depends what you mean by "personal" data by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      When people talk about needing entire drives for their personal data backups, I have to wonder: WTF have you got ON there?

      Pictures and Movies (no not hollywood movies)
      As ccds get bigger picture images get larger. I'm not a pro photographer, but I can still generate several gigs of pictures in a weekend. I also shoot hd movies. Fortunately these aren't as big, but they add up. I recently started my offsite backup and I had cover to 500G of stuff I didn't want to lose. I can see a pro photographer (or even an amateur) or someone shooting more video than me, having a bit more.
      Before I started backing my pictures up, I was backing up my source code, and my personal document directory. I was using a free 2G account.

  20. Just delete it! by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If there's some personal data you're missing at some point, just ask Google or the NSA ... But seriously, I've never made backups and not even bothered to copy over stuff from old PCs to newer ones when I upgraded (I keep old hard drives in a closet just in case there's something old I'm missing, but I never really do). The only personal stuff I keep safe is images on my iPhone (backed up on the PC) and email (safe-ish on the server at work). If I needed more space, I'd go with Wuala due to its relative safety (redundant storage, client side encryption) - but it's only free for 2GB or so nowdays. But ask yourself: do you really need all that data? I don't think so.

    --
    "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
    1. Re:Just delete it! by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      My nick actually tells something about what kind of data and how "just delete it", is an asinine response to give when talking about someone's data, personal or otherwise. Just because you only generate a few MB or even GB a day doesn't mean everyone only generates that much data. I generate 10s if not 100s of GB a week, most of which I do cull so I don't have 10s of TBs to keep up with. I am not that big a pack rat, but I do generate a lot of data doing what I do, even for personal reasons. Thanks for posting.

    2. Re:Just delete it! by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      I don't think so.

      Yes. Yes you do. Do you really want to delete all those pics and home movies of your child's first birthday?
      There are three main things I back up. My source code. My pics. My home movies. I also back up my personal documents, but they really aren't as important.

  21. Is your time more valuable than a new disc? by petes_PoV · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Deleting stuff is all very well. But unless you just do an "rm -rf *" and just be done with it. you need to invest some time in deciding what to remove, what to keep and whether that directory called family-photos really does contain what you expect it to. Even at minimum wage rates, the time spent trawling through a couple of TB of "stuff" could easily exceed the cost of a new disc - and then a background copy / backup onto it.

    Obviously you still have an issue of tracking things down on the rare occasions when you actually need some of your family photos. But you can rest assured that they're in there somewhere and weren't purged last time you needed a few GB for more webserver logs.

    Maybe the first step is to de-dup the existing data. You'll still have some manual intervention to check possible duplicates, but it's a first step towards tackling the bigger problem.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:Is your time more valuable than a new disc? by swalve · · Score: 1

      Agree. It is way easier to just buy new drives and schedule any purging you need to do for some later time. That way you can decide what stuff is important without the cloud of impending failure hanging over your head.

    2. Re:Is your time more valuable than a new disc? by burisch_research · · Score: 1

      Maybe the first step is to de-dup the existing data.

      Actually, there IS a good question. Is there some piece of OSS software that can do this for me? ('doze')

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    3. Re:Is your time more valuable than a new disc? by Dynetrekk · · Score: 1

      you need to invest some time in deciding what to remove, what to keep and whether that directory called family-photos really does contain what you expect it to.

      I have to say I agree on this point. However, in my own experience, I find that spending some time every now and then cleaning up my data serves to keep my data more useful, by restructuring the file system organization and by reminding myself what I have. Having several GB of data lying around that are in principle interesting or useful is all very well, but if it's not convenient to access and use, I just don't see the point. If my data aren't worth looking at and organizing at least to a minimal extent (this usually leads to at least some amount of deletion), I ask myself why I'm keeping the data around at all.

    4. Re:Is your time more valuable than a new disc? by hazem · · Score: 1

      I'm not exactly sure what is included in a full app that does de-dup, so this answer may not be what you're looking for.

      I had a hard-drive crash and was behind on my backups. The last "full" backup was 3 months old, but I also had lots of of current data backed up on various USB drives. I was also able to recover about 80% of the crashed drive, though some of the files were corrupted.

      I put all of this on a larger drive in different directories and ran a find with md5sum (and let it run all night). This let me figure out what I should keep and what was duplicated in another space. It's not very automated, but you just dump the results to text file and then sort/group however you want.

      I now have a NAS where I have automatic daily backups happening. And when I can afford a couple more drives, I'll add a second drive to the NAS to provide RAID1 (mirror, right? for redundancy) and an external 3GB drive for periodic backups of the NAS. I'll then be keeping that out in my unattached shed in case of fire.

      I really like the NAS. It's a QNAP, and with HD prices so high these days, the prices on the NAS came down a bit. It serves well as a backup location as well as media server.

  22. How important is the data really by Port-0 · · Score: 1

    I have a large amount of personal data as well (also, no pr0n), though I realized some place along the line that it wasn't that important not to lose it. When I die most of will probably be tossed anyhow. Who is going to want to sort through it all.

    With that said, I still don't want to get rid of all my data, so I have a drobo with 5-2TB drives, and I also have a linux box with raid set up, that backs up the drobo. But really, think hard about how much effort and expense you want to put towards keeping data. There is probably a whole lot of it that can just be tossed because you will never look at it again. It will probably save you a bunch of time and money to go through all the data and get rid of the stuff you'll never actually use. This actually works well for garages too.

  23. Fire safe + USB drive by hawguy · · Score: 1

    My fileserver uses RAID and makes a separate (encrypted) backup to an external USB hard drive (fortunately, my data hasn't grown faster than hard drive sizes so I can fit it all on a single 2TB drive, to ensure file integrity, periodically I have rsync verify file checksums,)

    As a secondary backup, I use a 1TB notebook drive locked in a USB enabled fire safe:

    http://www.amazon.com/SentrySafe-QA0121-Fire-Safe-Waterproof-Storage/dp/B00166187Q/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

    I used metal straps to tie it down and lock it to my computer desk in the hope that if someone comes in to steal the computer, they'll just grab it and run without prying off the data safe. The safe is only rated for 30 minutes @ 1500 degrees so it's not a perfect solution, but better than nothing.

    For my really important data (old tax returns, scanned in records and receipts, etc) I back them up to the cloud. For photos, I keep the full-size image locally (some TIFFs, mostly JPG's), but keep a lower res lower quality image in the cloud. All of this is less than 20GB.

    Most of my big data is DVD's that I've ripped and I'll count on insurance to replace them if they are lost - I don't even back them up to the drive in the fire safe.

     

  24. Friends rock by schrodingersGato · · Score: 1

    I had a similar problem. I had let a friend borrow an external for a backup and it came back write protected! He was using windows, I mac and linux, and could not figure out why/ how this happened. I was at capacity on that drive as well as two others and needed space bad (needed to back up a laptop before installing new os). A few other friends came to my rescue and allowed me to borrow some of their drives until i could find a more permanent solution. The suggestion to build a raid box is a good one.It will allow you to build up your storage capacity over time. My advice is to use multiple methods: back up locally AND send your most essential data to the cloud via an encrypted service (this will protect against a fire, theft, etc. Plus its handy to have access to your files from any computer). I like wuala personally, but spideroak is also very nice solution as well. There are lots of good, secure solutions now that are relatively affordable

  25. Have Less Data or Build a Server by MarcQuadra · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think it's time to admit that you're a hoarder. What exactly -is- your personal data that's so precious? I run a server just to keep my skill set up and run my side business, but I've only managed to accumulate around 600GB of data, only about 35GB of it is 'mine', the rest is client backups.

    So first admit that you're a hoarder, then decide if you wan to address that issue or indulge it. If you choose to indulge it, you're going to want to build a small home server. Something with a low-end 64-bit CPU (i3?), a gigabit LAN port, and lots SATA ports and 3.5" drive bays. Buy a bunch of high-quality (WD RE4?) matching drives that fit your data needs times two (you're RAIDing space away). Once you have that, install Linux on it, build a software RAID-1 or 0+1 array (don't do RAID-5 unless you can handle days of rebuild time), and format it with something accessible (read: in the kernel, like EXT4). Create a share on the array with Samba and happily access it from all your machines (don't bother with Netatalk or NFS; CIFS is great on all platforms). As your data needs grow, you can add drives in pairs or replace drives with larger ones and grow the volume. If you need backup, you'll want another array, preferably on another low-end box (an enclosure on your desktop?) but it can be built on a RAID-0 or JBOD to save money.

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    1. Re:Have Less Data or Build a Server by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      I think it's time to admit that you're a hoarder..

      Why is it so hard to believe that people have a lot of pics and home movies? Just because you want to save your pictures of your kids first birthday, doesn't make you a hoarder.

    2. Re:Have Less Data or Build a Server by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      I have a fair number of pictures, but those are small. This guy has a multi-terabyte thing going; between that and his username, I assume he has a LOT of video. In the case of video, it's time to say 'I won't need all this raw footage in DV format again'. It's OK to compress the video of the birthday party down to 1080p h.264 at medium quality, toss the project files, and let history remember you that way.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  26. It's that time again, is it? by QuasiSteve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's that time again, is it?
    http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2452630&cid=37557630

    Either..
    A: Buy that HDD. Yes, they're a bit more expensive right now ..or..
    B: Wait a few months, prices will come down again, buy that HDD then. Yes, you may lose your data in the mean time.

    Now stop asking or I'm going to pull over.

    1. Re:It's that time again, is it? by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      Thanks for posting. Really, that was my conclusion. Was more interested in how others are dealing with the issue and what they think is coming tech wise that might make our lives easier for retaining large sums of personal data. I did go looking for other articles, not sure how I missed that one.

    2. Re:It's that time again, is it? by QuasiSteve · · Score: 2

      Don't worry - happens to the best of us; I just think that /. should do better in these stories in terms of filtering them (off the front page or entirely). But that's a different discussion :)

      Your question seemed to set limits which are unrealistic, that's why the conclusion is really 'HDD' even though you specifically set that as something that wouldn't be an option.

      I can tell you how I do it, it's just not cheap. Also, it's not really 'managing' my data.. it's a storage/backup solution. The difference is that if I 'managed' my data, I wouldn't have tens of thousands of digital camera photos in a bunch of folders with meaningless names, but just a few that are actually worth saving to me. It's not that I'm saving all the others for future generations either, I just don't have the energy to go through so many photos and delete all but the best (the very best I've already shared anyway).

      But if it's just storage/backup...
      1. Every write made to the main HDD is mirrored via a mirroring RAID setup. Pure mirroring, I don't want to deal with RAID levels that use parity/etc. that may save some space but are a PITA to rebuild (and must be rebuilt - a simple mirrored HDD mounts just fine when taken out of the RAID).

      2. Files are written to a versioning filesystem, so that if I delete something that I later regret, I can get an older version back (presuming things didn't run out of space and it had to be overwritten with new data).

      3. Files saved to a specific area are further synced with a cloud storage solution. These are basically files that I need to be able to access from any location at any time (short of the cloud hoster folding/etc.) asap in case of an emergency. There's very few files that qualify, so bandwidth and monthly caps aren't an issue. I did upload about half a GiB worth initially, though.

      4. Every night the computer does a differential backup to an external, also mirrored, HDD, over the network. This is a set that is in a completely different area of the house, so if I manage to trip and splash water all over everything here, the others are fine.

      5. Every 2 weeks (used to be weekly) I bring one of the HDDs in the mirroring set in the other room to an off-site location (basically a storage locker). From that off-site location I bring back another HDD and put that into the RAID, and force an update of that HDD from the other one.

      So -if- one of my main HDDs dies, there's always the other one. If they both manage to die at the same time, I've still got a daily backup in another room. If that dies, that has another one. If those both die, I still have a 2-weekly backup in an offsite location. If that one's dead as well (what are the odds??), then all my most important stuff is also in the cloud. If that cloud storage solution goes belly-up at the same time and data can't be retrieved? Well, I'm screwed. But life does go on - people whose houses burn down often don't have such a rigorous backup method in place, and they pick up again as well.

      That said...
      6. Of very important photos, I've got prints (a Kodak booth does better than your home inkjet) or even negatives (the better photography stores can point you in the right direction for that). Of very important documents, I've got print-outs (laserjet). Of very important video? Nothing. Of very important (music) recordings? Also nothing. I have no such 'very important' of the latter two - but I think you get the idea: I would have gotten those transferred to film and/or tape. The reason is that those can easily be seen by human eyes or played back for human interpretation - digital data not so much.

  27. So you do not have backup? by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Drives die, sometimes without warning (and old statistic by IBM says 50% of the time there is no warning). You could just throw everything away, as you are going to lose it anyways, sooner or later. Or you could find the resources needed to make sure you have everything on at the very least two drives (one of which should not be connected or running). There is nothing that can replace reasonable backup.

    As a side note: Common sysadmin wisdom is to have 3 independent backups in addition to the original.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  28. Hoarders: Digital Edition by joocemann · · Score: 4, Funny

    You might be on the next spinoff of Hoarders programs, a digital hoarders show.

    In this show, redundancy, old versions, and files that haven't been opened in 5+ years are brought into question, for which you will be embarrased to defend... You will attempt to justify why you still have linksys drivers for a wrt54g you don't even have anymore. And no, the DVD ISO of the Alvin and the Chipmunks movie, that you never burned or watched, is not worth saving.... Neither are about 85% of the digital pictures you took (you know, the ones that were the 'bad shot' that you took before finally getting the good one).

    Take a day or two, go through it chunk by chunk, and purge! PURGE!

    1. Re:Hoarders: Digital Edition by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      You nearly said it, but I'll just come out and ask: what is this vast quantity of personal data? If it isn't downloaded movies or rips of DVDs the OP owns... Maybe he's a film maker or prolific but unpublished musician.

      We need more info because the only option, other than deleting stuff and throwing money at the problem, is some clever solution based on the specific data in question.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Hoarders: Digital Edition by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Yup, if it is just junk downloaded off of TPB, well then your recovery solution is to re-download it off of TPB.

      If this is raw DV video of your vacations, convert it to mpeg2 or something a bit less disk-heavy, and burn it to DVD, or store it on a hard drive in a remote location. That stuff doesn't change much.

      For stuff like documents there are lots of good cloud-based solutions - you should be talking 100's of MB at most there, not TB. You need to be smart and determine what is really worth saving.

    3. Re:Hoarders: Digital Edition by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      Try about 18 months worth of project backups and some active other data. Deleting is not an option. Just wondered what others were using other than HDD for personal backup and regular maintenance. Thanks for posting.

    4. Re:Hoarders: Digital Edition by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Maybe he's a film maker or prolific but unpublished musician.

      Or maybe he takes a lot of pictures of his kids.

    5. Re:Hoarders: Digital Edition by joocemann · · Score: 1

      I produce music, and have for about 16 years. At some point many of the previous work had to be purged.

      What you need to do is fully acknowledge what will or will not be used in the future. If you set an age threshold, and then make sure you will not hold onto 'maybe' stuff, you will get quite far.

  29. squeeeeeeeeze it by burdickjp · · Score: 1

    Compression is your friend. Also, weeding out things you don't use. Hording is problem in the digital age as well.

  30. Raid + mirror with a friend by cstdenis · · Score: 1

    A friend and I each have FreeNas servers with multi TB raid-z.

    Some of our data we keep mirrored between them.

    The servers are physically brought together occasionally for a full sync, but most of the time rsync -n is done over the internet to see what needs to be updated and the data transferred on a removable hard drive.

    --
    1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
  31. That's an easy one. by Zapotek · · Score: 1

    I just put everything on Facebook -- hey, where's everybody going?

  32. Storage? by Sooner+Boomer · · Score: 1
    Answer:

    Floppies

    More floppies

    More floppies

    (I can sell you some cheap!)

    --
    Chaos maximizes locally around me.
  33. p4tw by Maglos · · Score: 1

    I was given a p4 optiplex desktop which I am using for my fileserver. I have a pair of 1.5tb disks and a pair of 2tb disks in mirrors running freeNAS on a usb thumbdrive. The optiplex is great because is quiet, fast enough and the case conveniently fits 4 drives(and free). I have a cheap 4 sata card for the drives and I splurged on a decent intel gigabit nic after couple other cheap ones with no luck (asus and dlink I believe). If you do the thumbdrive thing, make sure and buy two and dd the contents over, one failed on me and now I have to manually manage my raid via cli. Of course this does not protect me from myself, but I haven't lost too much due to my own stupidity. I used to have a larger fileserver with all sorts of little drives, but I replaced them with a couple big ones and I'm much happier for it. Lots of people swear by drobos. One person I know plugs a decent usb drive into his hacked router. Rsnapshot is good for automatic incremental backups.

  34. Budget? by RedHat+Rocky · · Score: 1

    As others have noted, if you can't afford AT LEAST another drive, serious problem right off the bat. One wonders what the data is worth given this.

    I'll move on, assume the data is worth AT LEAST another drive or two (we're talking a couple hundred bucks at most, come on):

    1. drbd: raid to a low cost, remote machine with similar sized drive. Dead drive is now recoverable.

    2. amanda or similar backup to drive on remote machine. No, not tape, just virtual on disk. Now have a backup history as well in case one needs that file that one deleted 6 months ago.

    Yes, cost is a couple hundred and some older machines, but really, what is your data worth in the first place?

    --
    Anything is possible given time and money.
  35. Bite the bullet by no-body · · Score: 1

    Get older version LTO drive, get identical harddisks with spares and do full drive image backups with incremental backups in-between.
    Mirroring disks (Raid 0+1) is good too.

    All that other stuff - DVD/Blue Ray, cloud is chickenshit. Drives die or act up.

    Run Linux on one drive and do image backups from there.

    Zerofill the empty space,
    dd if=/dev/zero | split --verbose -b 2000m -d - ZERO

    compress the image:
    dd if=$DEVICE | gzip -v | split --verbose -b 2000m -d - NAME

    and write the chunks to tape.

    1. Re:Bite the bullet by hazem · · Score: 1

      If you're sticking with harddisks instead of tape, you could also use partimage, which only copies the active areas of the disk. I've used it successfully for years (it's how I used to "refresh" my windows boxes... install everything, make an image, then 6 months later, restore, update, reimage, repeat). Partimage can even chunk the files so even if you were going to tape, you could still use it.

      I've also used Clonezilla successfully a few times. It also only considers active areas of the disk, so you don't spend so much time filling the rest with 0's. Plus it's partition-aware so you could restore the image to a smaller (if it's larger still larger than your data) or larger drive without dd leaving you with a strange partition table that doesn't really match the drive.

      However if you do like dd, one strategy I used to use in larger network was to have a linux machine running sshd, boot up the client machine on a linux disk and use something like:
      dd if=/dev/hda bs=8192|gzip -9|ssh -l work server "dd of=/images/imagename.gz
      to backup a machine and the reverse to restore it.

      You could also do this with tar:
      (cd /; tar czf - * )|ssh -l work server "(cd backup_location;tar xvzf -)

      if you can work with just the files.

    2. Re:Bite the bullet by no-body · · Score: 1

      Interesting points, taking images from a live system I would not do though - tar example.
      But hard disks as you describe would not work for me, not enough disk to hold all images and disks die as well, then what?

      Different story as the original poster wrote, though.

      Tapes are great - can be stored easily off-site and several generations of history can be kept.
      Locate tape, plug into machine, restore chunks on disk - put other machine to be loaded back on network, start under a RIP disk, reload, put incremental backup on top and you're back in business.

  36. Define what your Backup Must Do First & Why by BoRegardless · · Score: 2

    People have different needs. Some needs are imposed by either employers or the wonderful US Govt. for mandatory data retention. Others are your life's design work that you want to retain until you die. Other data you want to pass to your kids. If you can't afford to lose it keep multiple backups on multiple media in multiple locations. Books & pamphlets have been written on this. Transfer the data to new media once a year or two or three & keep all working drives.

    No single storage device local or remote is immune from disaster. The Alexandria Library succumbed and took with it countless early human treasures. Wars have done in archives all over the world. Lightning, outages and power surges can defeat the best protections even when electronic equipment is turned off, but still plugged in (laptops are better when left unplugged, which is actually a great asset).

    Backup is one thing; recovery is another and it can be GUT WRENCHING. The recovery process needs as much thought as backup.

    A Clue or Two: A business partner had his MBPro backed up to 2 external HDs. Not great, but OK. Said MBPro crashed on the Lion upgrade. No way to know whether it was hardware or software and the MBPro should have at that point been off limits for use until carefully checked out. He happens to live in an area subject to lightning and outages which can affect anyone (even with a UPS). However, he reinstalled the Snow Leopard and plugged the first BU HD in an attempt to reload the data; HD became corrupted. Should have stopped, but then the 2nd HD was corrupted. Moral of the story; Recover data from a backup to an external HD running on another computer than the one that got mucked up.

    The cost of 3-4 external 2-3 Terabyte hard drives and a couple cases or RAID box is dirt cheap compared to the value of the hours you put in on your computer each year as are Blue Ray drives & disks.

    Caution: Someone on this list mentioned putting drives and disks in a "fireproof safe" or "fireproof file cabinet"; wrong! The UL approved boxes are designed only to protect "paper" for a given amount of time in a typical fire by releasing steam (212 deg. F = goodbye DVD/BR disks). Once the fireproof agent uses up its water...Farenheight 456 takes care of all contents...permanently. This is why multiple locations are needed.

    1. Re:Define what your Backup Must Do First & Why by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      Again, not backup. Read the OP. The drive in question is the backup and just needs to be reformatted. I do know what I am doing, just asking if my obvious solution was the only route. Seems like everyone agrees, except those that think I was asking about backing up data. Nope. Done that. Just maintenance and need to move some data. Thanks for posting.

  37. Re:Synology 2 disk NAS by ericdano · · Score: 1

    Except the latest batch of Synology machines (like my recent DS1512+) seem to have a hardware flaw. You reboot them and they die. And then just TRY getting Synology tech support over the weekend........NOT HAPPENING.

    Raid and an NAS is a great thing. My Infrant (Netgear) NV has been solid for 5 some years now. Synology seems like a nice product, but if the thing is going to freeze up and die on a reboot and I can't get tech support for it over the weekend........fuck that.

    --
    It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
    I moderate therefore I rule!
    --
  38. Try free, open-source SparkleShare by SpzToid · · Score: 1

    SparkleShare looks and works like Dropbox, but is actually just a fancy automated self-hosted GIT repo, (which you can interact with using GIT commands on a remote repo if that is what you want to do).

    The wiki explains how to encrypt things (and the encfs recipe doc'd on the wiki also works with Dropbox, etc.)

    I think the project has matured really well, but still isn't really well-known, and doesn't even get mentioned much on the slashdots, although that's where I heard about it.

    www.sparkleshare.org

    https://github.com/hbons/SparkleShare/wiki

    --
    You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
    1. Re:Try free, open-source SparkleShare by FTWinston · · Score: 1

      Hmm, that project needs much more "about" text for me to have a clue why I'd use that rather than just a git script.

  39. How important is uptime? by tirerim · · Score: 1

    I'm assuming to start with that you have backups of everything in some fashion, with which you could put it all back together if your biggest drive suddenly failed spectacularly.

    In that case, how important is uptime to you? Since this is personal data, I'm guessing that you could live without live access to it for a few days. And given that, I think your best bet is not to keep a spare just sitting around, but to only buy one when you need it. Hard disk prices keep going down, and the price for the same drive six months from now is almost guaranteed to be lower than it is now, barring things like the Thailand floods. The other big advantage of this method is that when you upgrade to bigger drives, you don't have to immediately upgrade your spare as well -- and if you manage to go a whole upgrade cycle without needing the spare, then you've saved yourself the purchase of an entire drive.

    At the moment, because your drive is possibly failing, then yes you need to get that spare. But if the current drive is actually failing, it won't be a spare so much as a replacement, and then you're back to the same situation.

  40. The Cloud with Slow Internet Connection.... by bigal123 · · Score: 1

    I was in a very similar situation about 3 months ago, but with 80+ gigs of data. I had pictures that don't compress well, personal documents all sorts that needed to save. I used to just back them up to an external drive. Then i would hear stories about something happening to peoples computes and their external drive that was left connected. I never wanted to go to the "cloud" and loose my data, besides I had a very slow DSL connection so uploading would be a pain. I went researched the cloud solutions went round and round then held my nose and purchased a subscription to Mozy. Yes it took about 4 weeks to get my data upload. Of course i was using the internet connection for other things at the time also. At the time I figured what is 4 weeks when i have gone for so long with very few other options. After everything was done I now have Mozy running in the background and every few house it backs up. I love it I feel more comfortable about my data being safe. I don't have to worry as much about it. I still use my external drives for things like an extra copy of my Quicken data but that may change as I change my habits as Quicken data is also backed up by Mozy. For me I worry, what could happen to a computer, drive, even raid corruption, fire, flood, tornado, etc. I am paying for it and i know some want something free or less cost, but if i want to spend less i guess i could use the free version of Mozy and just do a few docs and no pictures. However family pictures are just as important as some of my personal documents. I know some may prefer one of the other backup services but right now I can say I am impressed with Mozy, even on my slow connection.

  41. Re:Homebrew Offsite Backups? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    I do much the same, with a few minor tweaks:
    - Rather than NFS, I use a tarpipe: Source box uses xinetd. It's a little faster, and uses less processor time at the backup box. Which is important, because...
    - The backups box also compresses the data it gets (pigz or bpzip2, depending where the data is from) and encrypts it (gpg - have to use assymetric encryption so the backup box doesn't need to store the key) in case of theft. It takes rather a lot of processing power to handle this, but a Core 2 Quad does the job nicely.

    As you're running it over the internet you'd want to replace the xinetd-and-tar with an ssh connection (You can make ssh run tar directly in place of a shell) in order to avoid sending plaintext over the internet. Depending on the data, you might want to move the compression to the source device as well so reduce the pain inflicted upon your usage caps.

  42. Quit screwing around. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    SDLT tape drive and some tapes. If your "personal data" is not worth the $800.00 to buy a good used SDLT drive and a few tapes, then it's not worth backing up.

    Just do not dink around with theoretical "backup solutions" that are not proven. and no, hard drives are not "proven" for reliable and long term backup. I have DLT tapes from 16 years ago that I know for a fact I can still read.

    If your data is important, You dont screw around with consumer hard drives that are known to have a low MTBF.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Quit screwing around. by mlts · · Score: 1

      Nail, head hit.

      For small amounts of data, I like backing it up to multiple locations. Burn to CD/DVD/BD with Nero's SecureDisk (which creates disks that have error correction on them. If one wants to be beholden to Windows, it also offers AES-256 encryption and signature validation.) For use with a cloud, one can create an encrypted TrueCrypt container, and stash that on DropBox. Then, have an external laptop HDD that gets a copy of data. This is great for having a pile of documents that can be worked on from multiple machines at once.

      Eventually I'm going to bite the bullet, pay the $1800 and get an external LTO-5 drive (with a SAS card). Then, for $40, I can back up 1.5 TB (LTO-5's uncompressed capacity) of data with ease. Combine this with a SATA or USB-3 drive (USB-3 can do 625MB/sec, the LTO drive can do 280MB/sec, so I have enough I/O overhead that the drive won't shoe-shine, especially if attached to a dedicated server), and that is as close to an ideal backup solution for large data as you will find, period. To boot, LTO-4 and LTO-5 drives have onboard hardware encryption, so the drive hardware can handle both compression and encryption, making backups faster.

      Drop a tape, if it isn't physically damaged, it will be A-OK. Drop a hard disk, and who knows if there might be hidden damage. So, for long term archiving (preferably with multiple backups and taking time to copy to new media), tape is king.

      As for the cloud for large amounts of data, don't bother. For the price of stashing a terabyte of data on most cloud providers, you can buy a 2-3 terabyte external HDD a month. The cloud is good for small documents, but anything past around 20-30 gig, find another solution, especially with ISPs charging by the megabyte after a certain limit.

  43. Manual on External HDs and good organization by seriesrover · · Score: 2

    My personal and family data (not including ripped DVDs etc) are about 1 TB. Mostly photographs and video with my DSLR so the files tend to get large...but I also have a ton of documents, app installs, and all sorts of misc data. I must admit I'd be curious as to what fills multiple external HDs for personal data but to each their own.

    Good organization outweighs medium in my case. 2xExternal 2 TB HDs - primary and secondary...and then a third stored off site at my parents that I update about 3 times a year, so if the worst happens I'm 6 mons out of date, but its usually about 4. And thats if both my primary and secondary go down. Thats a cost of about $300 total and a little a bit of effort.

    "A little bit of effort" is defined by how you organize. Backing up manually means I don't rely on software or a service, but it requires some forethought. For me I break it up by data type and usually year...sometimes I go one more by how that data was acquired (photos I add who took the picture). This is important because I put anything new into a diff folder so I know whats new and whats not. It took me a couple of years to get to the structure I have but I sometimes add small tweaks. The effort or time now is fairly miniscule.

    What I'm trying to get at is this : if you're prepared to put a small amount of time in every now and again, with an initial overhead, you can do this very easily and cheaply.

    1. Re:Manual on External HDs and good organization by seriesrover · · Score: 1

      I should add that with multiple TBs of personal data you can't pick something that is 100% fail safe, cheap, and effortless. You can only pick 2 of those. 40 Blu-ray disks equates to a 2 TB external HD. The odds are one of those Blu-rays will fail. I work off the principle that as soon as one of my externals start to cause problems I go out and buy a new one and remove the old one out of service - its not worth the trouble. Last time that happened was about 2 years ago.

  44. Consolidate by darkfeline · · Score: 1
    You can't tell me that you will use 1.6TB of personal data on a regular basis. Here's what I do: organize all the data you need to keep, but won't touch regularly or at all (let's be honest, if a file disappears here or there you probably won't notice, even if we all panic at the mere thought), and gzip-tar them (or your preferred compression method). Stick them on your backup drive(s). If you ever need to access them, just plug in the backup drive and untar what you need. Now, you have maybe 10-500GB of data left which you can rsync/your preferred backup method to a drive.

    Example:I move my archivable personal data off my HD as gzipped tarballs, and regularly backup my home and root directories separately as gzipped tarballs (that way I have a history of backups too, just in case). On ther other hand, I rsync my music collection separately because despite its size, I use all of it regularly, but I don't want it weighing down every single backup of my home. So you may have to come up with your own solutions for your own specific situation, but in general: consolidate and optimize!

  45. Spin up a home server by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    stripe the drives, export the whole pile as a share and copy everything to the server.

    Christ, this is 2012, storage is a solved problem.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  46. Onsite/Offsite Backup of Data Using Hard Drives by dancestop · · Score: 1

    I have a local Microsoft Homeserver for onsite backups. I also have an external drive encrypted with TruCrypt (opensource) where I spin off every 90 days my loved ones (files) just in case the house burns down. I take this external drive to work and lock it in my file cabinet. It is encrypted to make it difficult for anyone to steal the data but not the drive. I have too much data (like most people) between pictures, music and other personal data to play with uploading to the internet or writing to any optical disk. Obviously my risk is that both drive copies die at the same time.

    1. Re:Onsite/Offsite Backup of Data Using Hard Drives by dancestop · · Score: 1

      I forgot I also use PKZIP and run command level to copy a zip backup directory on a 2nd drive in a Windows machine. I put a datatime on the zip file so I can go back on backup versions. The code that I use with PKZIP is below if you are interested is below. ********* This command is scheduled with Windows scheduler and changes directory to "c:\data" where the data is.. ** backup starts next.... :: Batch program to compress daily backup for storage on CD-R @echo off cls :: Create environment variables with today's date values. setlocal for /f "tokens=1-4 delims=/ " %%i in ('date /t') do ( set Day=%%i set MM=%%j set DD=%%k set YYYY=%%l ) :: This batch program assumes that your scheduled backup file is saved :: as D:\Backup\Backup.bkf. If you use a different folder or file :: name, replace the values in the following lines. cd C:\data :: Use PkZIPC nZip Command Line Support to backup "pkzipc" -add -recurse -path D:/Backup/zip/data/B%YYYY%-%MM%-%DD%.zip *.* :: cls echo The backup has been compressed and saved as B%YYYY%-%MM%-%DD%.zip. echo. goto end :end :: xcopy "c:\Backup\zip\data\*.*" d:\backup\zip\data\*.* /d/e/c/S :: pause endlocal

  47. One Word Negates Using the Cloud by sehlat · · Score: 1

    Megaupload

    Whether YOUR data is of concern to the CopyrightStaatsPolezei doesn't matter. The moment Hollywood sees some site as infringing, their allies in "our" government and elsewhere will bring it down. You may note that the many innocent users of Megaupload, including, if some reports are correct, some government agencies, STILL don't have their data back and may never get it back.

    What you don't own, you don't control.

  48. bacula by urbieta · · Score: 1

    is the nerdy way to go, I did and it kicks ass specially when the ex-gf deleted my stuff

  49. Hard Drive + Safety Deposit Box by TrevorB · · Score: 1

    When I started my own business, I got myself a safety deposit box. Every time I go to the bank to cash my cheques, I use an external 3.5" HD mount, backup critical files using a script, take a hard drive into the bank and remove last month's copy. It has the added benefit of being fire and earthquake proof (two things I won't have if I stored them in my home.

    I only have about 200GB of data I consider "critical" though, but the same thing would scale up. At ~$40/year for a small safety deposit box it's one of the cheapest and most robust mechanisms for keeping your critical data safe.

  50. Spare drive + online backup by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 1

    I have a second internal drive that is automatically synced with the main hard drive that contains all the important data. (No RAID, just plain old backup.) Moreover, all important data is backed up from one machine to another and to an online server.

    For both of it I'm using Crashplan with a long-term contract. It's quite affordable and the software works really fine both for online and local backups. I don't understand why the "cloud" is not a solution apart from the obvious fact that you should avoid companies that use the word "cloud" too often. I've been using Jungledisk and Crashplan without complaint so far. Then again, I've never been struck by disaster so I don't know how easy it is to get the data back.

    If you're storing a lot of illegal content like pirated movies then you'd probably be better off with choosing a European backup provider, but in any case you need to have encrypted online backup if you really care about the integrity of your data. No local backup can safe you from a flood or a fire.

  51. Small budget? No problem. by jon3k · · Score: 1

    If the data isn't worth a few $120 2TB hard drives then it's not worth keeping, is it? 3TB hard drives are around $200-$225 also.

  52. Well let's see by jon3k · · Score: 2

    You ruled out: hard drives, tape, discs and cloud storage. What exactly do you expect us to say here? There isn't some other magical form of storing data we've been hiding from you.

  53. I do exactly that by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    Of my four internal drives, only one has non-recoverable data on it (business and personal). The others are things like games and applications which can always be reinstalled. So a second drive is the same size as the first, and a nightly backup combination of windows backup and a few scripts copies that data from the first to the second drive. I like having recent backups fully accessible.

    On the long-term side, every few weeks, or months, I copy from the second drive to a drive in the closet -- which really should be off-site, but I don't really worry about those types of things in my life.

    So between the two, I can really only lose a single day of work. For anything particularly impressive, I just drag the file to the second drive when I'm done that work, to make me feel better.

    But that's it. At this point, the closet has about ten drives covering the last ten years. The second drive has a good two years on it, fully compressed of course. And it takes me about two years to fill a backup drive. Of course, my business files are mostly text. If I were playing with more images than I do, I'd go through drives about ten times as quickly, which would mean one backup drive per quarter. Which is still only $300 per year these days, so that's fine.

  54. Data Hoarding and my solution by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First, let's look at your problem: You are gathering too much data. Either the data is 100% needed and irreplaceable, or it isn't. If it isn't, your first step is to treat your data just like you would physical junk that accumulates in your house.

    Create Three folders.
    1. Critical Keep
    2. Unsure
    3. Toss

    Go through your data and MOVE it to one of those three folders. If it isn't critically important data that you would be upset that you lost and can't be recreated (wedding videos, etc) It goes in the Critical Keep folder. If you aren't sure about it right now, but you can't declare it for folder 1, put it in 2. Anything else "old install files, backup data from a windows 98 machine, etc" That stuff can be deleted. Be harsh with yourself. Think of it like moving from house to house, if you haven't opened that box by your third move, just toss it in folder 3.

    Repeat the process until you either have everything in your Critical Keep folder, or your delete folder.

    Now, hopefully you have reduced the size of the data you are using to something marginally manageable. I'm a data hoarder, and I've managed to keep the rate of growth of my data to lag behind the general rate of growth of HDD capacity. Now for the fun stuff:

    Two things you want to avoid.

    1. Loss due to a dying disk
    2. Loss due to a destroyed home (fire, theft, etc)

    Here was my budget solution that resulted in a fire and forget backup system that is suitable for a home user and is about as minimal as you can get for cost.

    3 Disk Drives.

    A primary drive to run the operating system and hold installed programs and two LARGE data drives in a RAID1 configuration.

    Static data files (Video, pictures, etc) get stored on the RAID1

    A scheduled process (once per month for me) backs up the OS drive to a virtual HD file on the RAID1. The files on the RAID1 are then backed up to a cloud storage service (Carbonite in my case).

    So, what is the result of this?

    My operating environment is backed up monthly. The only thing I lose here is configuration changes or programs installed since the last backup (less than 30 days for me)

    The RAID1 ensures that my personal/static data is protected from a single disk failure, and helps a bit with read performance for the static (and large) files.

    Should a cataclysmic failure occur and my entire computer is lost to something like a fire, remember that I've been sending what is on the RAID0 out to the cloud (carbonite), so when I can rebuild a computer I can just download the (very large) offsite backup from the cloud to my new machine.

    The downsides I have right now:
    1. I maintain the windows backup as a VHD file because it allows me to ensure that the backup data is 'packaged'. I don't know the exact details about windows backup, but given that Carbonite sometimes excludes system files I didn't want to risk an important hidden/system file being missed in the backup. In addition I didn't like how it could only backup to the root folder of a drive. The downside is that the resulting 100GB file is a pain to backup, which is why I restrict the backup histerisis to 30days (previously I had it backup every 3 days) This keeps it from continually uploading the VHD file to carbonite.

    2. The HDDs for the raid1 lose half their total capacity in that configuration. I used it because it let me only have to use 2 drives and the performance boost. If you can afford 3 drives, go for a RAID5.

    3. Most Motherboards support RAID natively now. However, I understand that you can run into issues with hardware RAID if you have to switch to a different hardware solution. I haven't tested this, but it could potentially be an issue if you use a RAID5 from hardware and your motherboard fails and you can't replace it with an exact model. The good news here though, is if you have been backing up to the cloud, typically it's done on a per file basis, and thus you don't have to worry about this. Just download your stuff ba

    --
    Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    1. Re:Data Hoarding and my solution by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      You do realize that it is probably much cheaper to just buy a new hard drive and copy everything, than to go through the process you outlined?

    2. Re:Data Hoarding and my solution by drhlx · · Score: 1
      Watch out for those "green" drives. We used ~a dozen of them in various (linux-based, whitebox & "proper" server-based) configurations and found they had the highest failure rate of any drive we've used. At the very least, a) read up on them and b) regardless of drive, monitor their S.M.A.R.T parameters for early signs of

      failure (specifically bad sectors) and replace the drives when more than a few of these happen.

      The three biggest problems imho with RAID are:

      1. 1. The controller issue you mention above -- we use software RAID on linux for this reason (most of the time)
      2. 2. Do you know when a drive is actually dead? It can be mostly dead and you don't know unless it gets kicked out of the array. It's scary how often 2 or more drives get booted from an array in short succession too. SMART monitoring is a must (Google did a major study on HD risk failures years back - *any* bad sectors at all, and particularly rate of change in bad sectors were the single biggest indicators of near-certain drive death within 6 months)
      3. 3. What happens (specifically to the various layers of caching) under power loss

      #3 in particular is why some spend big bucks on expensive RAID solutions, #1 to an extent as well and particularly if you want 'performance'. You don't need this level of crazy, but you still need to be aware where your risks are so you can work around them.

    3. Re:Data Hoarding and my solution by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      One primary drive will run you $80. You can get slower 2tb drives for $100.

      $280 bucks and you greatly improve your data safety.

      I did this method because it requires three simultaneous failures for me to lose data. Both data drives in the array and Carbonite.

      I also did it because I was in a similar situation. I had a lot of spare drives, but many were small and most were mismatched. 'Just' buying a large drive and dumping to it is what results in situations like this. Unless you are always buying yet another larger HDD, you have to confront the issue that perpetually carrying data over isn't as cheap as it appears at first glance.

      Any true solution should establish a good foundation so you don't end up with a botched repair on top of a still existing underlying problem.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  55. ob by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    split(1)

    And a lot of Gmail accounts. About 300, I think.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:ob by allo · · Score: 1

      and a lot of time for uploading.

  56. Easy! by speedingant · · Score: 1

    unRAID (cheap, expandable, protected data) coupled with inexpensive offsite disk backup (eg your parents house, providing you don't live there already!).

  57. My 2 TB errrr cents by denmarkw00t · · Score: 2

    Delete your porn

    The rest of your personal data will fit on a floppy.

    1. Re:My 2 TB errrr cents by petenz · · Score: 1

      Delete your porn

      The rest of your personal data will fit on a floppy.

      He'll be floppy if he deletes his porn

    2. Re:My 2 TB errrr cents by denmarkw00t · · Score: 1

      streaming is the solution!

      See? Cloud is a viable option.

    3. Re:My 2 TB errrr cents by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Friend of mine just had to reinstall his laptop, using my help of course., and backup disks.

      From a 120GB disk, 45GB was porn he didn't even watch. Kept the "favorites" folder: ~1.2GB.

  58. Use a NAS with backup by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 5, Interesting
    What I did some years ago was recognize that "manual backups" were not done often enough, and important stuff was scattered around a few PCs. So I got a NAS, stuck a pair of disks into it (RAID 0 for speed), and set up its automated incremental backup to run 3 times per week to an external USB drive. The PCs now mount the NAS at login, and that's where all data files are stored by default (even the kids use it).

    We're up to 2 NAS units now, with 7TB[*] of disk space between them, all backed up on schedule. The USB backup drives are rotated every few weeks with another set kept in a secure place in the garage.

    [*] One NAS unit doubles up as media server, so it's got a load of movies & music in addition to user files in its 6TB. The other one is our web server and email server with only 1TB of disk space.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Use a NAS with backup by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      My backup drive is a fireproof 2 TB enclosure attached to an Airport Extreme, using Time Machine. That holds backups for my laptop and my home server. Most of the stuff I care about is on one of those two machines. The server is backed up continuously. I kick off a backup on the laptop every week or two. And when I'm working on important projects that aren't under external version control on a server somewhere, I back them up by hand onto a flash drive whenever I'm done working on them.

      Beyond that, everything else is media, which I back up periodically to large external drives that I bring them to work.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Use a NAS with backup by awyeah · · Score: 1

      What type of home server do you have? Is it a Mac of some sort using Time Machine, or can you access the volumes on your Airport Extreme using other means?

      --
      Why, no, I haven't meta-moderated lately. Thanks for asking!
    3. Re:Use a NAS with backup by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      It's a Mac running Time Machine. That said, the Airport Extreme looks just like any other AFP server, so if I cared enough to back up my MythTV backend box (Linux), it probably wouldn't be very hard.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    4. Re:Use a NAS with backup by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      So a good old fashioned house-fire of lightning strike on your house/garage and it all comes tumbling down?
      Not a good solution.

      Why is it that only an AC is foolhardy enough to take such a great leap into the dark, thereby impaling what little sense he had?

      BTW, you're quite wrong, as the garage and house are separate structures which are not adjacent, and there are no neighbors anywhere close to us. All of our buildings are separated by gaps of more than 12 meters - the planning regulations consider this the maximum distance that flames can jump in nearly all cases. As for lightning, well there are lots of spruce and pine in the 20-25 meter height range all around us (but none closer than 25 meters), and they'll pull down lightning quicker than our much lower structures. And our two NAS boxes and their attached USB backup drives are all protected by UPS so surges from remote strikes are unlikely to get them. We also have fire blankets and fire extinguishers in the house and garage, and the kids have even had practice putting out fires using blanket and extinguisher (the local fire brigade arranges free courses a couple of times per year).

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    5. Re:Use a NAS with backup by jasno · · Score: 1

      This is similar to the system I'm currently in the process of implementing. Two Seagate ST2000DL003's from NewEgg(bought 72 hours apart thanks to the stupid quotas) in a Synology DS-212. Raid 1 to handle disk errors since the speed is acceptible.

      Instead of timed backups I'm using manual backups to an external USB drive. I thought about periodic backups, but I want to keep myself in the loop so I only backup when I know things are in a consistent state. Once the backup is complete, the external USB enclosure goes into a fireproof safe.

      One thing I ran into when moving files from my iMac to the NAS - Snow Leopard apparently doesn't run periodic disc checks and it fails to notify you when files have I/O errors. I lost a few mp3s because of that. Even worse - after doing a disk repair the files continued to have I/O errors. Shouldn't they have been fixed - deleted or truncated, I don't care - during the disk repair?

      --

      http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
    6. Re:Use a NAS with backup by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 1

      NAS's don't get enough credit. I have a synology ds211j, and while it is not quite as stable or as fast as I would like, I have all my data in one place, and my laptops get automatically backed up on a weekly basis. The data is backed up to an external disk, which I really should rotate out and store off-site to be completely protected. I love being able to access all of my stuff via the internet as well, especially the ip camera when on vacation.

      I was curious as to how you force your family to use the mounted drives. I assume you have shares that get mounted. Did you just train them to use the mounted drives? I tried to make the music/photo/document/video folders map to shares on the nas, but was not able to on Win7. It seems the only way you can do that is if you make an iscsi share, but that has it's own problems in that is then completely separate from your other folders. Since windows apps keep defaulting to use the My documents (or whatever its called on win7), I often get sloppy and leave stuff in the local directories, and one of the biggest reasons I got a NAS was so that I would have a single place to keep all of my files and avoid duplication.

    7. Re:Use a NAS with backup by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      I was curious as to how you force your family to use the mounted drives. I assume you have shares that get mounted. Did you just train them to use the mounted drives? I tried to make the music/photo/document/video folders map to shares on the nas, but was not able to on Win7. It seems the only way you can do that is if you make an iscsi share, but that has it's own problems in that is then completely separate from your other folders. Since windows apps keep defaulting to use the My documents (or whatever its called on win7), I often get sloppy and leave stuff in the local directories, and one of the biggest reasons I got a NAS was so that I would have a single place to keep all of my files and avoid duplication.

      Well, "force" is entirely the wrong word, but "train" is closer. For each user, there is a directory on the NAS, and this is mounted via NFS (along with various shared directories) when they log in so it's easy to use.

      All three of our PCs at home run Linux, and I encouraged everyone to use their own directory on the server for anything they want to keep. This worked partly because of the automated backup[*], and partly because files on the server are available no matter what PC they log in on. Stuff stored locally in their ~ directory is not accessible from other PCs because the /home tree is obviously not in /etc/exports, and stuff stored elsewhere on local disks is not guaranteed to be backed up regularly (every PC has a local USB disk, but backup must be manually initiated, so it does not occur very often).

      The Synology boxes each have two identical disks in RAID 0, and thus are quick enough that there is generally no discernible performance hit for fairly large file operations. They can come close to saturating the LAN for reading, but are slower on writing large files after their write cache fills (slowdown is seen beyond 50-100MB file write). BTW, our LAN is mostly Gbit including to the DS211 file/media server, but the DS207 web/mail server only supports 100Mbit.

      [*] The perceived value of storing on a backed-up server was enhanced by innocently commenting that Daddy might accidentally bork an upgrade on one or more PCs some day. It has never happened, but the old message of minimizing your exposure to the folly of others got through...

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    8. Re:Use a NAS with backup by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 1

      Gotcha. On Linux it would definitely be easier- you could actually lock down their local disks and map their home directory to the NAS.

      I think there is something wrong with my ds211j. I am also on gigabit ethernet, and have a netgear soho router in front of my wireless router that everything plugs into. I still get abysmal speeds from my laptop. I tried different protocols (ftp, nfs, samba), and they all have the same problem, so it seems there is an i/o bottleneck somewhere- its not a laptop issue, because I can actually up/download faster to many servers over the internet. The one exception is iscsi- isci is screaming fast and feels like a local disk. I have had this problem for years and just tolerated it. I used to have a 207, and haven't done a clean install of dsm since I upgraded to my 211j, I have to block out time to do that soon- there are definitely ghosts of 207 past- I could not upgrade to dsm 4.0 until I cleaned my logs due to the original system partition sizes from the 207 days being too small. The web UI also seems way slower than it should be, but I compared it to Syno's demo system and it was comparable.

      I bought a new laptop exactly a year ago and almost did the full linux conversion then, but I bought a sandy bridge and the driver support just wasn't there, and didn't seem to really arrive in the distros until ~september. It was devastating to get ~4 fps in tux racer. I love visual studio too. So sweet.

  59. *Shrugs* by lightknight · · Score: 1

    There is important data, and then there is IMPORTANT data.

    Movies, games, music, documents are important data; that is to say I care about having it easily accessible, and at my fingertips, but I wouldn't lose more than a night's rest were it to disappear. Code is IMPORTANT data; that is to say that if it were to disappear, heads would roll.

    As such, and owing to the evil overlord rule of not having one of anything important, the important stuff is in plain sight, and exists in several variant copies; it only requires a mind of uncommon origin to understand where it is, and what it's worth. Finally, I keep the general ideas behind the important stuff memorized, in case those copies disappear. To this end, I apply the general rule behind the fictional philosopher's stone-> anyone who is meant to use my stuff would understand it, and anyone who is not will not; thus, it's only the intelligence of the seeker than limits them. It has been successful in keeping the bungling burglar, the thuggish criminal, and the demanding tyrant at bay.

    This all comes down to another evil overlord rule: the IMPORTANT stuff will not be clearly labeled as such.

    --
    I am John Hurt.
  60. Fireproof is NOT Firesafe; Oxymoron by BoRegardless · · Score: 2

    The words "Fireproof Safe" is by the definition of Underwriter Labs. It merely refers to being fire resistive for a given amount of hours in a typical fire "for paper".

    Forget DVDs and CDs and any hard drives surviving a fire in one of these "fireproof" devices. They are designed to release steam to keep the temperature at 212 def F until the fireproofing material exhausts all its water at which time the temperature goes up and, well...you can imagine what.

    1. Re:Fireproof is NOT Firesafe; Oxymoron by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unless, of course, you get the safe that's rated for computer media.

      This is an area where you really need to RTFTS (tech specs) as it will tell you EXACTLY what kind of fire, temperature and duration it will protect a specific kind of media for.

      --
      Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
    2. Re:Fireproof is NOT Firesafe; Oxymoron by careysb · · Score: 1

      And you won't find "media rated" safes at Office Max/Staples/Office Depot etc..

  61. rsnapshot + raid6 on server in basement by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My solution to this problem is painfully simple: about 5 years ago I bought 5 drives 500GB each. I have put a server (made from old parts, like pentium IV and so on) in the basement (where nobody hears it, and it can be as noisy as hell). I installed debian on it and configured cron to call rsnapshot three times per day for doing automatic backups of all PCs in my family. I never touched this machine since then.

    With one exception: 3 years ago I started to run out of space, so I bought 2 HDDs 2 TB each, reconfigured raid6, which was extremely easy because for raid I am using mdadm, which supports such operations online. Also I had few more spare drives during the years, so I kept adding them to the array, and currently there are 9 HDDs in this PC. It is very noisy, but nobody cares about that.

    It runs flawlessy, untouched for years, and nobody cares about it, except for when somebody in my family accidentally loses or deletes a file. Then suddenly backup comes very handy.

    Rsnapshot is especially good, because it keeps hardlinked copies of data from last week, 2 weeks ago, last month, and much more, depending on how you configure /etc/rsnapshot.conf. Currently I have backups dating back about 2 years, with granularity of 1 month. And it only occupies the space on HDD to reflect the changes between data, thanks to hardlinks.

    So my raid6 array has total size about 4TB and still 500GB free. And I feel this will last at least a year or two. In case of problems I can start deleting copies that are more than 1 year old. While most recent snapshot uses about 2 TB or such.

    Rsnapshot also can backup windows machines, so you don't need to worry about compatibility. Though I don't have windows machines and I don't test that in practice ;)

    --
    #
    #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
    #
  62. calculate folder size by issicus · · Score: 1

    best way to slim down = calculate folder size then sort by size. go from biggest to smallest. osx has it built in and if you have win7 FS-Inspect does the job.

  63. Use two external drives, keep one off-site by CptJeanLuc · · Score: 1

    I organize all my data into three categories, (a) stuff I need backup including old versions, (b) stuff I want backup of latest version, and (c) stuff I don't mind losing.

    Two external backup drives, one is kept in another location, the other at home. Every once in a while I switch the two, so there is always an offsite copy that is at most a few months old.

    Simple and stupid setup for making copies; each external drive is formatted with an encrypted filesystem. Made some scripts for copying with "rsync" for files which go into categories (a) and (b). Using some additional scripts for recursive "copying" of old versions with hard linking (on an ext filesystem) to preserve history for files in category (a).

    Keeping an off-site backup is important to protect against some risks such as fire, and it also helps prevent losing data in case some malicious software or accidental "rm -rf" or the like would wipe your backup. Keeping old versions of category (a) data helps protect against a scenario where master data is lost, and an rsync operation removes the data on the backup.

    If you want to be really paranoid, you could make the backup from a remote computer so that if the master you are backing up is compromised, it would not be able to wipe the backup (at least not "type a" data). Personally I found it was not worth the hassle, given the redundancy added by the offsite backup.

    If this is data which is important to you, keep in mind a RAID really gives you very little protection. It only offers some protection against hardware failure, but any virus or accidental wiping will kill your data just as well as it had been a single disk. If the data is important, you need at least one external backup.

  64. Drive in safe deposit box by TwobyTwo · · Score: 1

    You really, really want offsite backup in addition to whatever you do at home/office. If "the cloud" works for you, fine, but for many the bandwidth issues are a big problem

    One option is to have, in addition to whatever drives you run live, enough extra drives to back up your data twice. Keep one set at home, and another in a safe deposit box. Depending on your risk tolerance, you can use packaged drives, or carefully swap bare drives in eSata enclosures or the like. Backup as often as you can on the set at home. Then every few weeks/months whatever meets your needs, do a swap; put the up-to-date backups in the safe deposit box; take the other set home and use it for new fresh backups. With that as a base, you can usually use cloud-based solutions to make sure there are daily or immediate offsite backups of truly critical data that's changing often.

    Trust me: disasters do happen. You can lose a lot if you haven't prepared.

  65. Buy harddrives, make 1:1 backups by DanyX23 · · Score: 1

    Buy more harddrives. Seriously, just ask yourself how much pain it would be if would loose the data. It's easily worth a couple of hundred dollars/euros.

    As for what strategies, incremental vs 1:1 backups etc. I have recently written two blog entries for a filmschool where I regularly teach where they have the same problem - huge amounts of data, little cash, loose organisation. Have a read if you like (the newest blog post covers incremental backups with hardlinks under windows and osx which has some nice properties but is not always the best solution) http://www.danielbachler.de/node/121

  66. Raid + RAID by Rowan_u · · Score: 1

    I have 2 10TB RAID 6 servers running Debian that sync every night. There is also a emergency backup on Windows that is just 4 2.5 tb drives chained together.

    --
    only one everything
  67. Re:We'll be ENSLAVED in THE GAME by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    news for you, pal, "the game' has nothing whatsoever to do with electronic technology. It's been going on for ages. Just as a for-instance, the Roman Catholic church together with monarchs would mindfuck their subjects with B.S. about religion and patriotism, to take the worker's wealth and have power and dominion. Old, old scam, same old shit different century.

  68. Re:LTO Ultrium 5 3TB Tape Drive by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    might be needing an expensive pci-express card and cable to go with that, cost goes to +$2,000 to get started eh?

  69. eBay by Nagilum23 · · Score: 1

    Repeat:
    Buy a new 2TB drive, copy your data from your smallest drives to that one, then sell them at eBay.
    until you have all your data on new 2TB drives
    At the end you should have money for an extra drive.
    If you like (and use Linux) you can start a RAID5 with one drive (+1 missing), copy your data onto it, then add another drive, do a reshape, migrate your data...
    And at the end add the last drive to regain redundancy..

  70. delete ! by Inanna-qui-baille · · Score: 1

    I would suggest cleaning up unneeded data. I know it is not the kind of answer you are looking for but I am sure there are things that you do not really need, maybe duplicates or older version of sets of files. By making a throughout clean-up, you can probably gain many GB, you then might have enough space to swap your files around to be able to reformat your fleaky drive. Yon then have the time to think over to find a more durable solution for when this happens again.

  71. Re:Enjoy your pricy delusion by Nikademus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Storage on S3 is ridiculously inexpensive any more.
    I have about 6 TB of data that I need to keep backed up."

    So you mean that 6000/month*0.125$=750$/month is cheap?
    Or did I miss something?

    --
    I gave up with the idea of an useful sig...
  72. My backup regimen by rikkards · · Score: 1

    Basically here is what I do:
    Incremental ghost of the OS to a separate drive 3 times a week with a full on Sunday, on the alternate days it does a file based backup of require data to same backup hard drive of everything that has changed. No deletion of filebased backup but Ghost gets overwritten weekly
    Monday I bring home a portable hard drive using truecrypt from work and hook it up. Over night it does a mirror of the backup drive which gets brought back to work on Tuesday.

  73. What I have been doing. by chr1st1anSoldier · · Score: 1

    I am only an individual so I really do not have to worry about having a data farm or anything else like that. I have had decent success with cloud storage. I went with SpiderOak and that haven't been bad. It is fairly cheap (about a $1 per 10gb), has clients that will run in Mac, Linux, Windows, Android, iOS, and your data can be accessed anywhere with an internet connection by logging into your account on their site. They claim you data is encrypted before it leaves your PC to their servers and remains encrypted. SpiderOak also claims that they do not have access to your encryption keys so they can never look at your data. What I use is not the best service in the world, they are comparable to Dropbox but doesn't have the features that Dropbox does, but SpiderOak gets the job done. I just needed something that I could keep a backup of my important stuff on and if I need to reformat/reinstall for whatever reason I can get my important data back. However, I stumbled upon the Cyphertite project the other day and I am considering giving that a try.

  74. NAS and Online backup by Master+Of+Ninja · · Score: 1

    The question really is how much do you value your data? A little? A lot? My solution is a dual solution (albeit still waiting for the 2nd part to arrive). Online I have a subscription to CrashPlan (although there are other various services available which will do a similar job). You can get the software which will backup your computer (or selected folders) to another computer with the software installed over the internet (e.g. your parents if there is enough free space). If you pay a subscription you can back up your files encrypted to CrashPlans servers (and I think you can even put in your own encryption key), albeit it can take a few days to do this. You can even get family packs for multiple computers.

    The 2nd part for which I am waiting is a networked attached storage - I am getting a Synology product, although again there are other companies making these. The model I am getting will have 2 spare bays for hard disks of your choosing, and then you can run a backup on your computer to these which will keep the discs up to date. You can also use this as a file server, as well as a media server, bittorrent client etc. (see the synology website if you are really interested). You can stuff a couple of 2TB drives in there and even implement some sort of RAID.

    So you can then have an onsite and an offsite backup with a NAS and crashplan. The 3rd part of the solution probably is to trim down what you store as I can vouch I have a lot of crap that really doesn't need to be saved. Then do regular backups of the really important bits (for me this is not my itunes folder) to DVD-R.

    Overall it comes down to how much is your data worth and how much are you willing to spend?

  75. real problem by HarryatRock · · Score: 1

    This is beginning to worry me as well. I have several machines on a network and a 500GB external drive. A lot of my files are my own work including a lot of video which I would really not like to lose. So far I have made 1 copy of everything on DVD, but I am not happy with that, especially as I now have found that DVD-R seems to have a shelf life, as discs that I could read now seem to have errors, although this could be down to drive issues.
    I would love to get off site storage using an on-line system, but it would swamp my broadband just to get the current files saved, and I think BT would look askance at me maxing out my upload bandwidth for hours on end to cope with the backlog.
    I recently put a 200GB drive out of a broken laptop into a USB case and I am putting some files on that, but given its history I cannot really trust it. I do wonder if some of the old tricks of using a VHS tape might be worth looking at again, at least they are cheap and I think that if proper storage conditions are available they would have decent life.
    I once thought that files that came from the net didn't need to be backed up, but I am now finding that some files are no longer there, dead web sites or "new" versions which don't actually have the same content. So this is going to make things worse as every file I really like or use is going to have to be held locally.
    For me this is just a matter of entertainment or hobby interest, so I cannot justify (or afford) a high cost tech fix for the problem, but perhaps we have found a niche market for a low cost / true archive quality storage device for home use>
          2 > profit !
    so all we need is step 1 > invent device.

    --
    nec sorte nec fato
    1. Re:real problem by SuperQ · · Score: 1

      1mbps can transfer about 10GB/day.

      https://www.google.com/search?q=1+megabit+per+second+in+gigabytes+per+day

      Uploading 1T would take you a few months.

      I would suggest CrashPlan. They have a 'backup seed' service: http://support.crashplan.com/doku.php/feature/seed_service

      Basically they mail you a 1T drive, you let it fill up with ecrypted backup data, and then you mail it back to them.

  76. My Server by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    I have a 6x2TB array and a 4x320gb array in my server, the former with HD204UI drives on an Intel SASUC8I controller, and the latter with various 320GB notebook drives I've collected, in a 6-bay 5.25" rack on the motherboard's controller. There's also a 120GB SSD in that rack to run ESXi and most of the guest OSes.

    We keep all of our crap on the 4x320 array, which is backed up to the other array.

  77. Time Machine + rsync by Coward+Anonymous · · Score: 1

    For data to last it has to live. Data lives by continually replicating itself.
    For quite a few years now hard drives have been the only economical and practical backup solution for mere mortals (enterprise is moving there too). The best way to work around drive failures is ... more replication.
    Right now my setup involves continual backup to a RAID 1 drive with Time Machine (use whatever works on Windows/Linux) which is then rsynced to a remote server I setup at somebody else's house as burglar backup (after an initial local rsync on the source machine and sneaker netting the hard drive). This gives my data 4 drives to live in and I'm not sure I'm happy with that.

  78. So now EVERYTHING is powered? by professorguy · · Score: 2
    So they've convinced us that WASTEPAPER BASKETS must be plugged in at all times (shredders and so-called "electric dustpans"). And I see everyone out with gas-powered BROOMS. And even the SAP which drips freely from our maples is, in modern sugar houses, vacuum pumped to a tank.

    And now there's 200 comments where the people are proud of their kilowatt server arrays which are powered 24 hours a day for their PHOTO ALBUMS? Are you people shitting me? I mean, you're putting me on, right? You don't really use up 10,000 kWH per year storing your family photos, do you?

    Hey, I've just invented the electric elevator-button-pusher. I save a TON of finger wear and tear.

    Sometimes, humanity makes me sad.

    1. Re:So now EVERYTHING is powered? by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      I think your math is off by a decimal. Approx 100W gets you what we're talking about, and can do a lot more than store photos.

      A kiloWatt server sounds like something from the movies; it clearly has multiple GPU cards in order to render the awesome 3D password prompt, over which the hacker makes the word "override" appear.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  79. RAID is not a backup by Solandri · · Score: 1, Informative

    RAID sucks as a backup because if you accidentally delete a file off your RAID storage, it gets deleted from all the drives in the RAID. Your file is not safe as it would be on a backup.

    RAID is for redundancy. So you don't have any downtime if a HDD fails. Without RAID, a HDD failure would mean downtime until you can get a new drive and restore from a backup. With RAID, your array and your business keeps chugging along as if there were no failure, and you can replace your failed HDD at your leisure.

    Rebuilding a RAID array with a failed drive has been simple and automatic in my experience. Pop out the dead drive, plug in the new one, and it'll start rebuilding automatically. Your data is still accessible during the rebuild, although access times and transfer speeds may be degraded. Depending on the amount of data, a rebuild can take anywhere from a few hours to a few days. A second failure while rebuilding means all your data is gone. So you want to keep backups of everything on your RAID array.

    If you just want to glom a bunch of old drives together to use as a backup drive, you want a multi-bay JBOD/RAID enclosure like this or this. Be forewarned that if you plug these in over eSATA, you need an eSATA port with port multiplication. No laptop eSATA port I've found does, so you'll need to rely on USB or built-in hardware RAID/JBOD to use these with a laptop.

    If you want something which will sit on your network acting as a file server, you want a NAS like this or this or this. You can read NAS comparisons at Small Net Builder. But keep in mind what I said above - even if you get a NAS, you will still need to make backups of it.

  80. Simple math by eviljav · · Score: 1

    A 2TB drive is something like $120.
    Is protecting your data worth more to you than $120?

    If yes, buy another drive. If not, erase a bunch of junk you've accumulated.

  81. RAID it. by TempestRose · · Score: 1

    I use a Sans Digital 5 bay external SATA raid array for all the pics from 2 Canon digital cameras. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816111172 It's not backup. It's storage. I've had it for over a year, and it's pretty damn solid. It is NOT cheap, and you'll want a reasonably hefty UPS to handle it and the computer it's on. ( On the other hand, it is not Expensive either, for what you get. ) You MUST go the sans digital website and, pretty much only, buy the drives they recommend. If you do research and get RAID ready drives, you can call them and discuss with them your drive of choice, and then buy, at your own risk of course. I went this route. Bought the whole thing, external enclosure & SATA card, Drives, thru newegg. It does need a slot for the card. It slows your boot down. It is fast. It's RAID 5 w/ a hot spare as configured( i think). For Disaster recovery, you will still need something else. Overall, I love the thing. For backup, you might be able to get away with one of those top-loading sata drive holders. Move stuff off to two cheapy drives and store someplace offsite. Good luck.

  82. Re:RAID and multiple machines by zeigerpuppy · · Score: 1

    I recently had a similar issue and now use: Local: 3x 3TB Hitachi high end drives RAID 5 in external enclosure. Remote: Data that is really critical gets synced using rsnapshot (incrementally) to 'my own cloud', a dedicated server running Debian that I pay about $60 per month for (Fasthosts). It also runs a web/email/WebDAV server which is handy to access the incremental backups by the web. This way I get redundancy with fast access and decent security (all over ssh). Running your own cloud is pretty trivial these days, well worth the effort.

  83. Thailand flood by tepples · · Score: 1

    HDDs are kinda cheap.

    Have the manufacturers recovered from last year's Thailand flood yet?

    1. Re:Thailand flood by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Even with the increases in price, they are still cheap. I remember my first 1GB drive... I think it was around $250 or more... those drives had been around a while, but they finally dropped to the point where I could afford one... at that time, 1.5GB was the prize I think. Get the picture?

    2. Re:Thailand flood by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      I remember my first 20MB harddrive. It cost over $200. (This was in the late 80s).

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  84. The delete button by kikito · · Score: 2

    Not trying to troll here. I'm serious. Consider that you might be simply storing too much stuff.

  85. What are you asking? by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

    What are you asking? The ONLY answer is buy an extra
    drive(s) that match the total amount of stuff you don't want
    to lose, copy it all over.

    Problem solved.

    Anything less than this answer is less. More is buying double
    the amount of stuff you don't want to lose and keep a rotation
    of your backups.

    Further, break down each group of stuff you collect each month
    or quarterly and burn to a DVD.

    Don't forget you have to store these either offsite or in a fire-proof
    storage, or best... both. Otherwise, it's all an exercise in futility.

    Did you really just ask this question in Slashdot? Not sure what's
    worse, plain obvious questions that have been either asked so
    many times or is answered with a simple google search or obvious
    promotion of advertisers stuff.

    I used to be proud (and snarky of course) when I said that I read /.
    Now, I don't mention it... it's irrelevant to the newest generation and
    the current generation I'm sure has noticed that even as an news
    aggregator /. is failing. Nothing NEW is covered here any more. It's
    always old by the time it hits the front page sometimes painfully so.
    It's also obvious what stories get picked up and which ones get looked
    over. And then, to break up the monotony...

    "How should I back up my data that I don't want to lose?"

    effin brilliant

    -AI

    --
    For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
  86. Original Local Backup Remote Backup by LordLucless · · Score: 1

    My setup:

    • A QNAP NAS loaded up with 8TB of drives, in a 6TB RAID. I've got another 2TB drive spare, ready for replacement.
    • The QNAP is used as primary storage for large media files - ripped DVDs, etc
    • My local computers rsync their Documents directories daily, for general purpose backups
    • The QNAP rsyncs daily to an online backup service.

    Currently, they setup's been running for 2 years, and I've only ever used the online backup service for testing my backups, and I've never had to hot-swap a drive. I've got almost 2 TB of data in use, and I've finished ripping my DVD collection, so growth is slow now. My TV can play all my video files straight from the QNAP, and our phones can access it to download songs/audiobooks/videos through our local Wi-Fi.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  87. 3TB USB3 external drive by Trogre · · Score: 1

    A single 3TB external USB3 drive should address your needs nicely.

    Just unplug it when not actually using it (to protect against power surges, lightning, etc) so it can be considered a backup[1].

    I acknowledge the unplugging/replugging thing can be a pain if you need it frequently. What I'd really like to see is a hard switch of some kind that can physically interrupt both the power and USB lines to a device. It wouldn't need to cut the mains power, just the 12V/5V after the transformer, but would still need to give enough separation to prevent arcing in the event of a lightning strike.

    [1] Recall that an online backup is no backup at all.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  88. Ok, let me steer a little... by multimediavt · · Score: 2

    I am making my way through the comments, and want to clarify a little. I am not talking about backup. I am asking about disaster recovery or just plain drive maintenance tasks that should be done annually. The drives are my backup. Yes, good corporate data storage practice is to have spare drives around. I am talking about home. How many have 2 TB drives sitting empty on a shelf at home, just in case? I don't know anyone, personally, and I know hundreds of geek admin types of all ages and experience levels, myself included. We usually buy storage upgrades as needed and seldom have current technology, large drives just laying around because we're using them! Other than that, great stuff so far. Thanks all.

    1. Re:Ok, let me steer a little... by rainer_d · · Score: 1
      What you experience is nothing new. As you maintain data over a long period of time, you spend more and more time on maintaining, verifying, migrating, archiving it.

      You should be able to put a value on your data and then find a storage and backup-medium that represents this value.

      If the data is commercial, you should find a way to charge your clients for the purchase and ongoing maintenance of a storage-server .
      If the data is private, you have to get rid of as much of it as possible and transfer the rest to a long-term storage medium (which can be analog, depending on the data)

      As others have said, hoarding data is the same as hoarding physical stuff.

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
  89. Just keep migrating up by Sarusa · · Score: 1

    Here's my scheme:
          - USB 3.0 External drive, as big as I need to back up all my /data/ (not the OS) from all my systems. I usually buy the 'sweet spot' of most GB/$ even if it's more than I need right now. Powered off except when used.
          - Once a week I rsync it all over with a single script. Use cwrsync for Windows.
          - If it runs out of room, then it's time to buy a bigger one and swap out the smallest drive in one of the current systems with the old backup drive. I wipe the old small drive and put it in a pile, just in case, but they rarely get used ever again.
          - A small amount of really critical stuff I save off-site (rsync again) nightly with an automated script.

    I haven't lost any significant data in 20 years doing it like this (though it wasn't as convenient or fast 20 years ago), even though I have had systems crater - it's easy to restore from a drive.

    Backup to optical is so annoying I end up not doing it, and tape is clumsy and expensive (and for me has a very poor record of actually being able to restore anything) but if it's just a matter of turning on the external drive and running a script I can do it religiously.

  90. Off site Rsync by tuxisthefuture · · Score: 1

    Every 15 minutes my important data is Rsynced to my colleagues house and his over to mine. We then each have a USB hard disk which Rsyncs all of the local data. Works pretty well and ensures no data is lost of we have a fire/flood etc. All secured over SSH.

  91. To the cloud-mobile, Robin! by danpbrowning · · Score: 1

    Duplicity backup software: $5/mo (donated to EFF)
    FDCServers Atom + 2TB HDD: $45/mo
    Comcast Internet with 20 Mbps upload: $130/mo
    Running into your 250 GB transfer cap in just 24 hours: priceless.

    --
    Daniel
  92. Don't reuse old drives by MpVpRb · · Score: 1

    Unless you are on a very limited budget, don't reuse old drives for primary backup.

    Drives are cheap. Buy a new 1.5TB drive as your primary backup.

    If you really want to be careful, use your old drives for secondary backup

    I probably have 30 drives on my shelf after years of backups.

  93. LTO3 isn't really all that expensive any more by somename · · Score: 1

    If you buy used at least. I bought a 16 tape LTO3 library and 20 LTO 3 tapes for around $500 used on ebay about a year ago. It might be even cheaper now. And if you don't mind changing tapes every hour or so, LTO3 stand alone drive can be had for $200. Also, if you're only going to deal with only 1TB worth of data for a while, LTO2 is more than enough, and a used LTO2 autoloader can be had for under $200. Hard drives are never a proper backup solution. The data can be lost(without paying a few thousands for recovery at least) any time you plug in the hard drive. The tape solution is just so much more stable as a data storage platform, I'd say you look into getting used LTO2 autoloader at least. They really shouldn't cost more than a couple of hard drives.

  94. Re:Tape is not really that expensive. by zaft · · Score: 1

    Seriously? 10 tapes x $20/tape = $200/TB, almost twice as much as a 1 TB drive would cost you. And "tape lasts forever"? Hell no!

  95. All My Data Is Belongs To Me by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 2

    I use a 3TB (4TB -1) OWC Mercury RAID 5 array that is backed up constantly via Apple Time Machine.
    Time Machine rocks. By the time it starts bucketing data, it will be at the 3-year mark. I keep my eye on the disk health, and am prepared to swap out as necessary.

    I keep an external drive rsynced to my main drive, so I have an immediate backup, if necessary. I have used it, on occasion (sucks when I do -my primary drive is an SSD).

    That's my personal data. I have a Mini that uses a Drobo to store my Web site stuff.

    I don't keep any data from my "day job" on my personal systems. My system at work is backed up very well indeed.

    BTW: I use git for my personal source control, and Perforce for my day job source control.

    --

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

    -H. L. Mencken

  96. Think about it first... by meburke · · Score: 1

    Your "problem" is not well defined. A problem is the difference between the way things are and the way you ant them to be. In your case, you have a large amount of digitally stored data and you are afraid that it might be lost. What do you need to do so you don't have that fear? (This is not a "management" problem, but I will get to that later.)

    The only practical solution is to keep duplicates somewhere "safe", with safe being defined as someplace where you think you will be able to recover it in an emergency. Maybe the emergency is just a local hard drive failure, but it doesn't hurt to think of the effects of floods or Tunami. RAID is good, but I have customers who spent a lot of money trying to recover data stored on RAID arrays because they didn't have another backup. No matter what, you are going to lose some data in an emergency. Figure out how much you can afford to lose. This establishes the timing of your backups. 1 day? Ok, differentially back up your data 3 times per day on different backup media and you will not likely have to ever recreate more than a day's worth of data. Then arrange for the media to be copied or stored offsite so local disasters don't affect it.

    I predict that loss of personal data is going to be a big problem a few years from now. Even today, how many people who taped their kid's birth in 8mm film can actually find a way to view it now? What about those files, ideas and manuscripts that you saved on that Z80 running CP/M and had the MFM drive? Oh, and those old CD's that are now rotted away? Management means deciding how long you want this info to be available. Do you want your great-grandkids to see how it was to live in the USA before Communism replaced our Constitution? Better plan for it.

    Management might also include retrieval. I know at least one "backup solution" that issued a version of software that couldn't restore the data. I have over 3000 books. I don't need them every day, but I do occasionally like to go back and research or review some of the stuff I've read. Digital storage should allow us to have a tremendous amount of data at our fingertips if we can only put our fingers on the right set of facts... Semantic search is not quite good enough but it's improving. In the meantime, you might do worse than to use the data-cache model for retrieving your knowledge base.

    You can't get around the budget problem. You can purchase reliable solutions or you increase your risk.

    Family scrapbook solution: We created a scrapbook and made 6 copies which we sent to all the siblings in my generation of kids. If my brother's house burns down we can re-create his scrapbook for him. Use the same idea for digital safety and you might have a high probability of recovering it.

    --
    "The mind works quicker than you think!"
  97. For crap sake, no one should use RAID5 anymore! by ckthorp · · Score: 1

    If you're going to do RAID, seriously consider RAID6 over RAID5. Yes, the extra disk costs money and a port, but the bathtub failure probability curve suggests that after infant mortality and during the 20-30 hour RAID5 rebuild after a 1-drive failure, you have a significantly non-zero probability of a second drive failure (especially considering you'd be running it at 100% load for those 20-30 hours). My other solution is "rm -rf /*".

  98. Re:Prioritise and use tape by mlts · · Score: 2

    I do consider tape the best answer to backups. No, it isn't flashy like cloud storage, or the latest Internet rendition of it (be it a glorified file share, rsync, etc.)

    Modern tape drives are a lot more reliable than the old 8mms and QIC cartridges. I still have DLT tapes from '98 which are still readable.

    It all depends on the size of data. For the amount the OP has, if there is money, I'd consider an external LTO tape drive. They are around $1400 on NewEgg for a LTO-3 external, plus one will need a couple C notes for a SAS card. However, LTO-3 tapes are $15-$20, so $200 would back up 3-4 TB of compressed data, and with uncompressed, definitely more. Once the drive is bought, having the ability to save off the data completely for $200 or so is pretty economical. To boot, once the read/write tap gets flicked to read-only, nothing software-wise is going to be able to corrupt the tapes, and you can always pay for LTO-3 WORM tapes if you want true tamper-resistance.

    Tape will always have a place in IT, even if it is just for a place to save data cheaply long term for pleasing the auditors.

  99. Data Hoarders by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

    The same thing happens to people who can't throw away a candy wrapper.

  100. I think your issue is data integrity by guruevi · · Score: 1

    The physical problem has already been solved. Buy x number of x TB hard drives and put them in some type of configuration where they are all accessible at once. The problem with (desktop) hard drives is that statistically for every xTB you read an unrecoverable read error will appear. I manage over 100TB right now at my job using enterprise grade systems and almost monthly we have the system reporting a URE. The solution for that is checksumming. ZFS works great as does BtrFS and it keeps your data intact or at least reports what is bad about it.

    "File system errors" are simply unacceptable, you either use a very shitty file system or as said, there is a bad block somewhere on the hard drive causing you issues.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  101. Data integrity by thereitis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is my personal data and it is starting to become unbelievably unruly to deal with as far as data integrity and security are concerned.

    Keep all your important files in a version control system. Personally, I use Perforce (it's free for 2 users or less). That gives you: multi-revision history and checkin comments, an easy way to pull a subset of files to any computer in your house, and peace of mind that you don't need to worry about kids deleting anything important as it's all stored on the server with history. Also easy to see what has changed on any computer and check those files in. And there's a big win for data integrity checks: Perforce stores the checksum of all files (and revisions) and can easily check that every file still matches the checksum in the central database. If you have any disk corruption, you'll know about it when you run 'p4 verify -q //...'. You can store files of several gigabytes each with no problem.

    On top of this, I use rsync to copy the server data onto backup drives. I'm also looking at storing backups online, but haven't taken that step yet.

    I've been using this system for years and I couldn't imagine being without it. It's so easy to find and retrieve exactly what I want - my resume 5 revisions ago, my tax return, photos from 2003. Even without that, the data integrity checks give a lot of peace of mind.

  102. subversion by molecular · · Score: 1

    I keep important stuff (spreadsheets, letters, vector graphics, coding projects) in a subversion repo on my "home-server" which I keep synced with my laptop and desktop. That way, I always have backups of this stuff and I can update/commit from remote locations.

    Now for the stuff I don't want in the svn because it's just too big and I don't really need a history (photos, videos), that just resides on the server, cifs-mount.

    On some sundays (maybe about 4 times a year) I hook up a external sata drive, put an encrypted filesystem on there and do manual backups (not always the same stuff and not all of it, because I dont want to afford that many big drives). That drive then gets transported to alternating familiy members places for safekeeping.

  103. Simple server by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

    SuperMicro X7SLA-H board (E150 when I bought it more than a year ago)
    A couple of WD Greens(E100 each at the moment)
    A low power silent PSU (E100) (WARNING: this one has no ground and therefore no decent surge protection. Always combine with an external surge protector)
    Some RAM that fits (E50) (FreeNas advises 1 GB/ TB of harddisk, but will function perfectly under low loads with much much less)
    A case (free if you have one idling in the attic)
    FreeNAS (free).
    Total: E600 for 3x 1,5 TB (3Tb under raid 5), expandable quite a bit with PCI-E Sata cards (E50 for 4 devices. Raid controllers are overrated for home use. Soft raid gives les trouble if the hardware dies)

    --
    Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  104. My 2 cents (more like $$$) by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

    I'm currently building my own multi-solution. Beige box solution is the way to go.

    My game rig/media server/work station is a fast AMD Phenom with 1 150GB 10K rpm OS disk, and then four 2TB disks in RAID 6 as "storage".

    Eventually, I'll separate the boxes into one Amusement machine and another for media player/storage. I have CAT6A cables in the walls here.

    The storage disks are backed up over the network to my 4 disk Netgear NAS with "RAID X" (~6). I'm thinking 3 times a week.

    PC and NAS are on UPS, so I hope to get a 2nd NAS placed at my brother's house (in turn for some storage space at my place) for redundancy with monthly backups.

  105. Never use RAID5 with small number of large drives by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    Don't use RAID 5.

    RAID5 was a great solution when disks were very small and very expensive. Now they are relatively huge and cheap, so RAID5 is almost never a good idea.

  106. Re:Music I hadn't listened to in half a decade by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    I'd keep the music. One of my favorite hobbies is running music through Audacity to fiddle with the tempo and/or pitch. There's a ton of songs that I only sorta like as is, but they become favorites when I blast off a couple of custom adjustments.

    But give or take a couple of years, we were seeing a potential explosive breakthrough in storage tech, it may not even be worth nit picking files if you think you'll want them later.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  107. Re:Prioritise and use tape by mlts · · Score: 1

    Yes, there is an advantage of hard disks, because all it takes is just the cost of a drive. However, if there is valuable data on the drive and it conks, it is far harder to recover than a tape. A tape, you can hand to a recovery company (Kroll for example) who has equipment to get something off, be it reading raw patterns, decompressing them, and getting something back. HDDs, it isn't just the media, it is the drive heads, the platters, the magnetic media, the controller, and numerous other variables, which complicate recovery immensely.

    This is purely anecdotal, but in the years of working in IT, I have encountered one hard error from a LTO tape drive among thousands of tapes. I have plenty of dead hard disks, so from experience, I have a far higher chance of recovering from a tape than from a HDD sitting on the shelf. If I use a sane backup process where there are multiple copies (even a variant of grandfather/father/son), the chance of me permanently losing data is low.

    Now, other media such as 8mm and 4mm have been different, where the format wasn't designed for backups, as opposed to an audio/video format for consumers.

    Plus, it is easier to manage 50 tapes than 50 hard disks. Buy a couple sheets of labels for the tapes, and that job is done. Yes, one can use HDDs, but that isn't there intended purpose.

    As for long term storage, hard disks are not designed for this task. There is a reason why the warranty on all but enterprise HDDs tends to be a year, while LTO tapes have a lifetime warranty. Even though this doesn't mean one can get data back if it fails, it shows how much faith the maker of the media has in their products.

  108. Re:Piles of Disks by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    If the submitter doesn't want to just trash his disks, it might work to reorganize them. For me at least office files tend to be small - so make one of those small drives office/text data only. Then he can get a big new drive to churn all the music&videos on. If he still has more small drives to use, the third could be backup copies of software installers.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  109. Re:Never use RAID5 with small number of large driv by wolfguru · · Score: 1

    Raid5 still gives n-1 storage for N drives, even with the larger drives available, it is still a pretty efficient way to get fault tolerant storage. Mirroring (Raid 1) is also cheap given the size of the drives available vs their cost, but is about the least efficient storage, n/2 storage for N platters. If you are going to be backing up a high volume, fault tolerance makes sense, as does a soft de-dupe if you can set it up using something like Linux on an older PC chassis.

  110. your data by SebNukem · · Score: 1

    I think the problem you need to solve first is how to keep your personal data at a reasonable size. I can't see what TBs could be. I'm sure a large portion of it not that important and might get lost without affecting your life.

    The way I do it is try to keep my *most important* data at a reasonable size (a few 10 GBs), compress all that can be compressed, and put the absolutely most important part of it on Dropbox.

  111. Synology by waTR · · Score: 1

    I use to have your problem. Then I went out and bought a Synology 211 NAS. I love it. It has a fantastic interface (DSM 4.0). It is set up for Raid 1 at the moment with mirroring. I have had integrity issues with my drives where I had to rebuild one of the drives. Other than that, I love the peace of mind I now have. Plus it is so compact... check it out.

    --
    Huh? [devShell.org]
  112. Simple... by RichiH · · Score: 1

    1) git-annex (if on Unix)
    2) badblocks -swo foo.bb /dev/foo #this will erase all data on disk. If it reports even one single bad block, toss the disk out.

  113. ZFS - one onsite one offsite by bearfx · · Score: 1
    Setup your own home server, barter with a friend to setup an offsite server at his place using his internet connection. Rsync from your home system to the offsite. Make sure to ssh in a couple times a month to check the server status. For data integrity, I recommend zfs.

    I am a big fan of zfs for its data integrity features. What I did is below

    Home Server (you can configure a minimal hardware file server with components to fit your needs, this is just what I used) Quad core Athlon X4

    16gb memory

    LSI HBA SAS

    9x2tb hdd

    The hard drives are configured using raid-z2 with one spare. I am using zfs on linux now, but freebsd works great, and their forums are very helpful for people new to bsd. This server is overpowered for my uses, but it also is a media server, web server, samba server, etc. ZFS has snapshots as well, which work great.

    Off site (at a friends house)

    Core2 Duo

    8GB memory

    onboard sata

    4x2tb hdd using zfs / raidz2

    This system is a low power system sitting in his closet using his internet connection. I only sync the stuff it would be difficult for me to replace. The initial filesystem was created at my house, directly off my server to RSYNC only has to send deltas.

    I looked at online backup solutions, but my upload speed is so slow (512K up) that it would take forever to get the initial upload into the vapor. Further, the low end, low cost providers I would look at are more likely to fold, leaving me without a backup.

  114. distributed FS by bmimatt · · Score: 1

    I've had a good experience with MooseFS (http://www.moosefs.org/) using my macbook pro and a couple of old BSD boxes.  There are other distributed filesystems that will give you peace of mind in terms of storage resiliency - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_file_systems#Distributed_file_systems

  115. A rack server and RAID by ramicio · · Score: 1

    I have a Norco rack mount server with an Areca RAID card. I currently have 6 2TB drives in RAID 6. They are Hitachi "green" desktop drives. The controller died a few months ago, and I RMAd it. Once I got it back, all was well. I didn't lose ANY data. I think people saying RAID card failures and drive failures is way overrated. From what I see, people are saying parity is unsafe. I just don't get it. My future plans are a Supermicro case, 2 Xeons, tons of RAM, a bunch of LSI HBAs, 24 drives (haven't decided on the size yet, the shortage is being played well by the corporations), and two a pool of 2 striped raidz2 arrays (like RAID 60). I'm not much of a fan of backups. I am a home user and my data is not worth the cost of a second server with another 24 drives. A tolerance of 4 drive failures will be plenty peace of mind for me. Cloud storage is BS unless you have some unlimited gigabit fiber ISP. Even then, certain data can become contraband and be deleted.

  116. 2 Servers by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1

    Buy 2 servers, preferably used storage array servers. Start a raid 5 or 6 array on one. (This server is the storage server.) This is your main storage drive. Store ALL data on it. It's helpful to have it support multiple access methods (SMB, NFS, iSCSI, etc). You could go full OS like Debian or something like OpenNas or OpenFiler (BSD based).

    On the second box, add as much storage as is accesable on the first. This is the backup server. Run a cron job to regularly r-sync the data off the Storage server over to the backup server.

    In this configuration, you have some redundancy in the RAID and a true backup in the second server. You also have the ability (hopefully) to drop in drives as you need so you can expand as you go. And if the hardware it's self breaks, you can simply replace it and keep going.

    --
    I do security
  117. Truecrypt, Wuala, Dropbox, External HD by toggaM · · Score: 1

    I use a variety of uses to backup my files. First off, it's only about 140GB compressed but I limit it to Bly "important" files and even that could be trimmed down.

    My setup:

    Linux box with 1 TB, encrypted HD for my data. 1 TB external HD, encrypted for weekly backups using rsync. Dropbox in encrypted container for a small selected amount of not overly personal data. I'll never drop personal data in Dropbox because access to my encryption key is available by the company. Small backup goes to Wuala. Slightly more personal data than Dropbox but nowhere near the bulk. I also have an issue of upload speed (650 Kb) and 60G cap. Every 6 months I backup (update) photos to DVDs and but in lock box and also keep set at work locked away. Finally, every year I travel to the parents place for vacation and make copy of external HD to keep at there place.

    It's a bit of work to keep on top of but it becomes routine.

    How many ppl actually restore these backups? Too many times ive seen backups go bad because they were never checked. I randomly do a full restore 2-3/year.

  118. Re:Never use RAID5 with small number of large driv by Elrond,+Duke+of+URL · · Score: 1

    Okay, I'm sold. :)

    What would be a better alternative be then? At home, I've got a Linux RAID-5 configuration running on my file/media server/MythBox. I built it several years ago with four 500 GB drives. Its performance has always been more than enough to handle standard-def MPEG2 recording from the TV encoder. Soon, though, I will need to upgrade it with larger drives and that would be a good time to switch from RAID-5.

    At work, I'm about to build a new more powerful workstation/server. To say that my budget is constrained is putting it lightly. Currently, it has two 1 TB drives in a RAID-1 config. We had an external backup/snapshot drive, but it has since died. Our write speed requirements are not at all extreme, so current drive speeds should be fine.

    I guess RAID-6 seems like a good alternative in these cases, supposing the array is built with a minimum of four 1 TB drives? I don't think I need the performance of RAID-10. At least, at home, I'd rather have the extra space. I'm also not considering SSD drives in these two machines as I can't justify the cost.

    So much to consider...

    --
    Elrond, Duke of URL
    "This is the most fun I've had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"-Sam&Max
  119. Re:Never use RAID5 with small number of large driv by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    I've been using RAID10 on my squeezeserver/mythTV box, personally, for about five years now. But I got a case of server-grade hard drives for free (nearly all my equipment is dumpster-diving booty) and honestly I built around what I had on hand. Outrageous performance but it's a noisy, power-hungry machine compared to most home servers, even with temperature controlled fans and so forth.

    I'm about due for a home server rebuild too, and I was also thinking about RAID6 this time around. Unless I find another case of hard drives somebody's throwing out, I guess.

  120. Backup/Restore? Planning for pain. by hicksw · · Score: 1

    If you think backup is slow, wait until you try a restore or RAID rebuild.

    Copy/sync to a duplicate file system on a replacement drive in an external enclosure.
    When the internal drive fails, swap in the pre-loaded replacement, and refill the external enclosure.

    This also allows for growth.
    --
    The Truth of Large Numbers - almost all numbers are larger than you can imagine.

  121. publish your data by xizzi · · Score: 1

    Publish your data to book. As a process it will force you to really consider what is valuable. Your photos and coorespondanes make the cut. It will push you to put more effort into your writing diaries or lettters. Your really sensitive information can be locked in a safe. Most of that stuff is is useless. If you had two minutes to evacuate you should be able to get what really matters. And I don't think it will be your tax returns!

  122. Re:We'll be ENSLAVED in THE GAME by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    I could have used many other Christian or muslim sects as example. point is the NWO was set up centuries ago, too late to worry, pal. The "technology" for that can be done by hand or by computer.