Subject:
|
Re: New LUGNET server hardware details
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.geek
|
Date:
|
Sun, 29 Feb 2004 02:22:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1484 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Thomas Garrison wrote:
> Hmm, no tape drive or CDRW.
Nope, I hate tape backup (too slow, too small, too expensive, too unreliable)
and CDR's are too small and too labor intensive. Of course, the lack of a CDRW
drive doesn't preclude physical media backups from being carried out elsewhere.
> How does off-site backup work---over the
> wires to Todd's office?
Via rsync to various off-site points, and then from there via tar to various
long-term physical media such as DVD-R.
> I do hope that there is a backup outside of Boston. . .
Indeed. Yes, initially that will be DVD-R's of tarballs, sent via snail mail.
Matthew and I are both big on off-site backup.
I'm also a big proponent of chained (nested) rsync such that an accidental file
deletion or some other random accidental corruption isn't propagated through the
rsync backups at warp speed.
I've also been giving thought to a Disaster Recovery Plan and testing.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: New LUGNET server hardware details
|
| (...) I agree completely on the utility of tape. Speed, size, cost, and reliability are always a problem; tape systems seem to always be a generation behind what disk drives need (and with the relative demand curves, they are not going to catch up). (...) (21 years ago, 29-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
Message is in Reply To:
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
