George Georgalis wrote:
My tendency is to think an off site raid mirror functioning as a
copy of the local raid mirror snapshots is pretty comprehensive.
It is difficult for me to focus on the benefits of dated tape, hd,
or cd/dvd in a storage facility. What is the real benefit of that?
Very quick disaster recovery is not necessary, but 3 days would
defiantly be better than a week to recover. How do I find the
sweet spot of medium, interval and rotation? Is off line medium
really necessary here?
Make your system into a RAID 1. Buy new drives every two weeks.
Pull 1/2 of the drives and rebuild.
Repeat every two weeks.
If the old ones need to be online, put them in a separate system.
Recovery is instantaneous. Put the old drive back into the system and
reboot.
Given that you are talking about less than 150GB of stuff, a single
drive purchased every two weeks is only going to be slightly more
expensive than tapes in similar capacity.
It also means that someone checks the RAID array once a month or so.
This is a not insignificant problem in small businesses.
For small businesses with mainstream needs and not a terribly high
pressure for 100% uptime, RAID 1 with drive rotation is almost *always*
better and cheaper than tape. When you reach the point where someone in
the company goes, "Hey! This recurring cost is expensive. Is there
another choice?" you actually have people who will listen to an
intelligent discussion about backup.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
