Well, I assume that even looking at a subset, it may be obvious that for 
something like user data, for example, that some large percentage  of it may be 
greater than several years old and not accessed in the last 3 years (or 
whatever your threshold may be).

We were pretty easily able to take a statistically valid sample of our data and 
extrapolate out for a good amount if it, even if we didn't account for the 
overall total.

-sc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:53 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Archive data
> 
> Uh,
> 
> If you don't know how much storage there is, how do you know that any of it
> needs to be archived?
> 
> Just asking...
> 
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 06:49, David Lum <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Windows servers for file/print, and a *lot* of IBM SAN storage (about 4
> servers racks full - dunno how much storage it is since SE manages it), which
> is ex$pen$ive to expand and far more than we need to spend to keep users
> old crap. Functionally a 2TB RAID1 USB would be sufficient. I'm thinking $1000
> or less of NAS with a ROBOCOPY job (pulling from six different servers or so)
> should be more than sufficient.
> >
> > I have submitted a proposal, we'll see if it flies.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 6:19 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: Re: Archive data
> >
> > What is your current system? Hardware and OS?
> >
> > Is it using SCSI, SATA, SAS, PATA? Is it hardware RAID? Does it hot swap?
> >
> > Frankly, if your hardware hot swaps, and it's SATA or SAS, it might be
> > cheaper and more efficient to swap out disks one at a time, let the
> > array rebuild and then expand your space. Once you've replaced the
> > drives, Win2k3+ should recognize the new (unpartitioned) space, and
> > allow you to expand the current partition to fill it.
> >
> > As pointed out, if they can't say for sure that they don't need it,
> > then they probably *do* need it.
> >
> > Kurt
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 13:09, David Lum <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Wow - nobody?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: David Lum [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 8:18 AM
> >> To: NT System Admin Issues
> >> Subject: Archive data
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Do any of you guys have an automated method for migrating old, unused
> >> user data off your primary servers? I’m talking about data users
> >> don’t want to have deleted, but they maintain for “I might need it
> someday” purposes.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> To accommodate this I would think a cheap RAID1 NAS should be
> >> sufficient, there is no need for high-speed, multiple user access.
> >> I’m thinking it would be a very cheap way to pull a TB or so off our SAN….
> >>
> >> David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> >> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> >> (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
> > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
> >
> >
> >
> > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
> > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
> 
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to