Doug Crompton on 31 Oct 2005 16:17:36 -0000 |
I use hardware raid 1 here - two mirrored SATA drives. I think that would be the most cost effective but to get the kind of total capacity you want you would have to buy a drives equal to that size. I use two 160G in my array for a total of 160G minus overhead. My business depends on the hard disk industry. We make measuring equipment to test the magnetic properties of drive platters. As much as I like the business I find it so archaic to have a mechanical device spinning around 24/7. Also so much energy is consumed. I have to believe there will be a better way someday. Some kind of automted backup would be nice but not to tape. Maybe have an array of drives say five or seven. In sequence one would turn-on daily, backup from the network, and turn-off. The next day it would be the next drive, etc. Drives would be tested for integrity and a report issued. No drive would be on for more then 30 minutes in a week period. You would have the number of drives backup period in days. Of course the period could be changed. Maybe you would want to take a snapshot several times a day. Oh well just a thought. It is a sticky situation with the kinds of capacities we use today. Maybe distribution is a better approach. Saving your data to several widely separated systems. Doug **************************** * Doug Crompton * * Richboro, PA 18954 * * 215-431-6307 * * * * doug@crompton.com * * http://www.crompton.com * **************************** ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|