On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 13:05:35 -0700, "Jochen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > peter Wrote: > > Sorry, but RAID 1 is no replacement for backups. Your data is not only > > at risk from hardware failure but also from human error. If you > > inadvertently type rm -rf / tmp/* (note the extra blank) with > > sufficient rights under linux, you're screwed (yeah, done that). > > Agreed. RAID doesn't stop you from being stupid. But a backup e.g. on > DVD doesn't stop you from leaving the DVDs lying in the sun, either. > I'm not saying that RAID 1/5 is the end all, be all solution, but it > always depends on how much effort (time, money and hardware wise) > you're willing to spend. > > Mounting the music partition read-only and mounting it only rw when > necessary (e.g. when adding new music) already stops you from doing > most of the not-so-clever things, including the above mentione rm -rf > ;)
That sounds like a good idea. I know I'll find it too much of a hassle in practice. > > Actually, the best (and cheapest, easiest) option in the case of most > > music stores (which tend to rarely change) is to use a second > > (non-RAID) disk and nightly synchronisations using something like rsync > > (local or over the network). I'm lazy as well but my crontab is very > > patient and perseverant. Ideally you would do this with an off site > > machine, but another local machine or even a seperate drive in your > > single machine would be ok too. > > Sure, if one's willing to have not just one, but two or even more PCs > running, this is even better. Just make sure your rsync doesn't do a > full sync and also delete files ;) It helps a lot if you use rsync in combination with a copy-tree of hard links. That way you can store a number of snapshots. In my case being able to look back a day has been sufficient. Especially with music files. I use this method: http://www.mikerubel.org/computers/rsync_snapshots/ > You could as well keep another copy of the data on a independent disc > (maybe even attached to the same computer), only mouted when needed for > backup, and keep a copy of the data there. Needless to say that you > could as well use RAID there. I do that as well. For one of my colo machines I keep a seperate unmounted nightly synched disk plus nightly snapshots to my home server over adsl. A day of data loss is acceptable in this case. Never happened yet (knock on wood). > RAID is not the answer to all backup needs, but it keeps you fairly > safe from hardware failures. And if I'd have to choose from a > standalone single-disk NAS and a standalone PC with mirrored disks, I'd > always pick the latter. Depends on the purpose. If it's not a high availability system using the two disks seperately and synching nightly would be my preference. If a day of data loss is a big problem, I'd choose the RAID. Regards, Peter _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
