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?"

38 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 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.

    4. 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/

    5. 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?
    6. 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.

    7. 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).

  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 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
    2. 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.

  3. 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 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);}
    3. 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.

    4. 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
    5. 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).

    6. 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
    7. 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)

    8. 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.

    9. 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...

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

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

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

  8. 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.
  9. 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.

  10. 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
  11. 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.

  12. 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
  13. 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.

  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. 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
    #
  17. 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...
  18. 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.
  19. 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.