Subject: Re: Remote Backup Options (Was: Ripping and Storing CDs)
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <email@example.com>
From: Curt Sampson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/26/2003 08:37:27
On Sun, 25 May 2003, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> > I don't think the tapes can take all that much heat, either..
> The problem is that "fireproof" containers such as safety deposit
> boxes and safes typically resist flame by generating water through an
> endothermic reaction with high activation energy. Tapes will survive
> this -- they're designed to -- whereas disks won't.
Actually, at least for my purposes, this kind of thing doesn't really
make a difference. I'm doing backup (for disaster recovery), not
archiving, so losing the backup is merely an annoyance so long as the
original is intact. I just have to make another backup.
For archiving, of course, the situation is quite different. For that,
I'd suggest you make a copy of your important tapes, and test both the
originals and the copies on a regular basis. When either has an error
rate that is too high on a test read, make another copy before further
(The tape backup option is also rather more expensive for relatively
small (under a couple of terrabytes) amounts of storage. A half
terrabyte of RAID-protected storage, basically a small PC with four 160
GB drives, is well under a thousand dollars. Last I checked, an 80 GB
DLT drive was going to be a couple of thousand dollars, and 12 tapes
would run me another several hundred dollars.)
Not that I'm trying to discurage this discussion; I still find it
interesting and useful.
Curt Sampson <email@example.com> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC