On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 10:54, DaZZa wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Terry Collins wrote:
>
> > DaZZa wrote:
> > > It all comes down to what you weant to spend. The way to minimise the
> > > chance of data loss best is to do a full backup, every day, and never
> > > recycle media - but this gets _damn_ expensive!
> >
> > The real expense is system(s)/network down time, if any. So run it while
> > you sleep.
> >
> > For a home system, with blank CDs @35c each, it is so cheap. Just buy
> > 100 in bulk and 100 plastic sleeves (or use sadwich bags). By the time
> > you use them up, the next lot will be cheaper.
I've been following a recent discussion on another list about archival
storage ("What do I do with all these hundreds of gigabytes of digital
photos?"). The most interesting thing for me from that was an
article[1] conducting tests on a number of different brands of CD-R,
which found that most of them deteriorated to unreadability within two
years.
I guess this means, if you're serious about storing your data for
extended periods, you spend a little more than 35c a CD. :-) It also
means very careful storage, and probably re-burning your backups once a
year.
Or, as has already been mentioned, a second-hand tape drive becomes a
serious consideration.
> Yes, if you have such a paucity of data you can fit a backup onto a CD.
>
> When you're talking 200 gig a day or more, then you're talking somewhere
> between $50 and $150 per tape, per day {depending on drive type}, it adds
> up _real_ quick.
What would a home user be doing to need to back up 200GB a *day*?
[1] http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/7751
--
Pete
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
