You're absolutely right about backing stuff up that might not need
backed up. Here at work, that's becoming a problem. I back up a >bunch<
of duplicate data during full backups. It becomes more of a problem as
the size of the data files gets bigger and your backup window shrinks.
There are enterprise-level pieces of equipment/software that will move
old, unchanged data off of the production array and onto a slower, less
expensive array for warm storage, leaving a pointer behind so that the
user can still get to the data. The unchanged data can be backed up
much less frequently leaving the production data on a much smaller
volume for quicker backups. At this point, my full weekly backup jobs
are in a race to sunrise with my backup window. I'm planning a storage
consolidation project with Dell and EMC for next summer, and this
feature will definitely be part of our solution!
However, if you want to go back to a certain point in time on a changed
file, sometimes having those backups can be a good thing. My personal
full monthly backups easily fit on a standard CD, so it works OK for
now.
If I need to run a backup of a directory where changed files may be,
then I'll just run an "incremental" or "differential" backup (both at
home or at work.) Both of those methods will pick up changed files, but
the difference is that incremental jobs will mark the file as backed up
so that the next incremental or differential job won't back up the same
file until the file gets changed again. The differential backup does
not mark the file as backed up. If you have a vast number of changed
files to back up on a regular basis, the incremental job is the way to
go since it backs up only the changed files since the last incremental
or full job.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of
> Barry Oliver
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 8:42 AM
> To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
> Subject: Re: DML: OT: Network / Server
>
>
> The problem with using DVDs for backup is that you either end
> up with 26 copies of the same file that either hasn't
> changed, or changes every time and you end up with 26
> versions. Using a Hard Drive makes it easier to keep track
> of the current version of important files - wheather you want
> to keep versions or you just want the most current.
>
> Another problem is you may be tempted not to burn an entire
> DVD just because you changed only one or two important files.
> When percieved waste causes you to skip backups, you are
> asking for trouble.
>
> I use hard drives [multiple, using a removable tray
> arraingement] for backups, and DVD's for regular archival storage.
>
>
>
> Pindell, Tim P wrote:
> > What he said. External/portable drives are inexpensive and
> easy to use.
> > You could also use a DVD burner for backups, although in my
> experience
> > those are better for off-line storage. They are also write-once so
> > there's no accidentally overwriting a good file. (I like to burn
> > financial stuff to CD and keep them at the bank with my other docs.)
> > Keep in mind that you'll need at least three (preferably identical)
> > drives for RAID5. Most enthusiast mainboards these days come with a
> > decent SATA RAID controller baked right in. You could use a
> workstation
> > as the file server, but just be careful that it remains
> stable for the
> > other users. I prefer a separate box. Anybody else want to add
> > anything?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
> >>[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of
> >>Barry Oliver
> >>Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 11:56 PM
> >>To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
> >>Subject: Re: DML: OT: Network / Server
> >>
> >>
> >>One machine, lotsa drives.
> >>
> >>1 drive for OS and SW.
> >>SATA Raid Array for media, Raid 5 is preferrable.
> >>...a 750 gb drive in an external case for transfer and backup
> >>duties [think fireproof safe between backups]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Jamie Calder wrote:
> >>
> >>>I realize there's a bunch of computer nuts here so this is
> where I'm
> >>>starting my research.
> >>>
> >>>Right now we have 4 computers wirelessly networked, 2 for
> >>
> >>my wife business,
> >>
> >>>my laptop and the kids computer.
> >>>
> >>>I would like get another one (or 2 depending how we go
> >>
> >>about this) and use
> >>
> >>>one with Media Center in our living room on our HDTV. I'd
> >>
> >>also want a better
> >>
> >>>backup solution, perhaps a raid setup. What's a good setup
> >>
> >>for our use?
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Have one server with raid with all our files on it
> >>
> >>(personal and business)
> >>
> >>>networked with the Media Center computer, our office
> >>
> >>computers, and personal
> >>
> >>>computers?
> >>>
> >>>Or can one of these computers be also used as the server
> >>
> >>(Media Center
> >>
> >>>computer with raid as the server)
> >>>
> >>>What is Windows Home Server? Is this a server that needs
> >>
> >>an operating
> >>
> >>>system installed on it, an operating system in itself or
> >>
> >>just a computer
> >>
> >>>that holds files (no OS)?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for any advise!
> >>>
> >>>James
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 02 2007 - 15:23:18 EDT