On Thursday 13 July 2006 12:37, Eben King wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, steve szmidt wrote:
> > On Thursday 13 July 2006 12:03, Eben King wrote:
> >> Well, I'd be very hesitant to back up to the same device. Yes, it
> >> protects you from random filesystem damage, but I had a (30GB?) drive
> >> where the best I could figure was the head periodically went across the
> >> entire disk writing garbage. It wouldn't protect you from that, or from
> >> any one of other systemic failures.
> >
> > You are right but he's not looking at backing up to the same device if he
> > has raid-1.
>
> True, but that's what's happening now. Or have I misread this:
No I don't think you did, but the subject was adding RAID-1.
> I'm just saying that in my case, I looked at RAID and others, and chose my
> current system. Presumably my requirements aren't _too_ bizarre...
Your only problem is that if you have a crash in the middle of the copy you
would loose the file it was reading at the time. Otherwise drive to drive
backup is nice and fast.
On busy servers, but not mission critical, I do drive to drive on the server
and then let another backup machine read the backup drive over scp.
--Steve Szmidt
"To enjoy the right of political self-government, men must be capable of personal self-government - the virtue of self-control. A people without decency cannot be secure in its liberty. From the Declaration Principles ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:39:47 EDT