| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 80073 | 2007-06-10 21:30:00 | Server Back Up - Best Way? | susann (12077) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 558018 | 2007-06-11 03:49:00 | Solmiester - we are currently using BrightStor Arc for our backup, apparently we will use the same with the new tape system. Any thoughts? I'm not very familiar with the program, have only monitored the daily backup and done a couple of restores. | susann (12077) | ||
| 558019 | 2007-06-11 05:21:00 | Tapes are still considered to be the industry standard. (The QICs and their friends never qualified as real tapes.) That drive seems amazingly cheap. The big reel to reel drives for 1/2" 9 track tapes started at around $18000 20 years ago. |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 558020 | 2007-06-11 05:34:00 | Why not use a portable hard drive or two? It would be cheaper, faster and would be perfectly feasible for your storage amount. I bought an LTO HP backup system last year, paired it up with Backup Exec, running smoothly, data size has grown from 62Gb to 110Gb with max on this drive of 200Gb. 110Gb in 3 1/2 hrs is pretty good and I dont know a better system other than tapes........ A good hard drive will average about 60 MB/s at continuous writing. That's 32 minutes for the same amount of data. Allow for interruptions and you may have to wait 45 minutes. Use an inefficient filesystem and you might even be pushing an hour. I know next to nothing about backup solutions but it looks for this amount of data like you will get better backup speeds at about 1/7th of the cost (for 2 drives of about 300GB). Incremental backups would definitely be worth considering as well. |
TGoddard (7263) | ||
| 558021 | 2007-06-11 05:43:00 | Have you tried EMC or are they way to pricey? | winmacguy (3367) | ||
| 558022 | 2007-06-11 06:11:00 | The cheapest form of backup is not necessarily desirable, and "a couple of portable drives" is not going to be enough. This is a proper backup system. The auditors might want to have a look at any proposed system. |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 558023 | 2007-06-11 07:13:00 | You could look at an upgrade to the latest version of arcserv, buy an external USB drive and a LTO tape loader. You could then backup the first server to tape, and concurrently back up the others to disk. Then when the tape drive becomes available you could duplicate the backup to disk backups off to tape. Alternatively, If you could 'cross grade' to Backup Exec, you could also do a thing called synthetic backups. That way you do a full backup to disk once a week on the week end (slow), then do (fast) incrementals. The synthetic full backup is made by combining the (slow) full backup with the incrementals, and the resulting synthetic full can be dulplicated to tape. To do backups properly you do need to spend some decent money though. I'm sure the business might appreciate the true value of good backups if they consider the impact of losing everything.. or even the cost of a single weeks' productivity. |
BIFF (1) | ||
| 558024 | 2007-06-11 09:19:00 | As suggested, a few removable large hard drives will achieve everything you want - inexpensive, reliable, built-in redundency, portable, quick, efficient. Give up on the old people's ideas with their last century methods - this is 2007! | Greg (193) | ||
| 558025 | 2007-06-11 09:52:00 | Most of the trouble with normal hard drives is caused by the handling before use.You want to fill them up with backup data and move them around some more and hope that they become more reliable? | PaulD (232) | ||
| 558026 | 2007-06-11 12:06:00 | Why not use a portable hard drive or two? It would be cheaper, faster and would be perfectly feasible for your storage amount. A good hard drive will average about 60 MB/s at continuous writing. That's 32 minutes for the same amount of data. Allow for interruptions and you may have to wait 45 minutes. Use an inefficient filesystem and you might even be pushing an hour. I know next to nothing about backup solutions but it looks for this amount of data like you will get better backup speeds at about 1/7th of the cost (for 2 drives of about 300GB). Incremental backups would definitely be worth considering as well. Sorry bud, but there is no way windows explorer or a backup solution, will move 110Gb in 32min...LOL...The files are too small. I wish it could!.. |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 558027 | 2007-06-11 23:51:00 | Most of the trouble with normal hard drives is caused by the handling before use.You want to fill them up with backup data and move them around some more and hope that they become more reliable? I agree - the last thing we want to do is hand over bulky hard drives to our receptionist to lug up to the bank each afternoon. Portability is a must. |
susann (12077) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||