On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:36:55 +0000, Greg Cope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The problem is that there is *NO* economical backup solution for > > end-users with hundreds of GB of data. The only thing that comes close > > is to have another RAID in another machine that you mirror to. [deletia] > 400Gb drives are becoming common and cheap. > > Plus a surge plug is not that expensive.
For me it's more an all-eggs-in-one-basket/HDD issue, less of a backup/archival issue. Also, this machine was a fully UPS'd machine; expired warranty killed it, not surges. ;-) Yes, to get an equivalent amount of real storage in a RAID configuration I'd need 3x200GB (2 storage + 1 error correction) or 6x100GB (4 storage + 2 error correction) or even 11x50GB (8 storage + 3 correction) to match that single 400GB drive. But a single lost drive costs me more in wasted time re-building the full machine OS+software+data, especially the data piece scattered across a multitude of CD and DVD archives. What I'm looking at doing is offloading the always-on data access portion to a RAID-based Linux box in the basement. I think I'll start with a 3-drive software RAID configuration; I like that it's not tied to any specific RAID hardware chipset, and speed isn't super-critical since networking will be the primary bottle-neck. Interesting discussion, everyone! Andrew. -- If you don't know what to do, do something.
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
