HDD vs Tape or other for backup?

[pnrenton]

What should I use for backup?
System is a single PC with 120 GB HDD.
CD or DVD backup seems too small for this.
Tape drives seem about the same as hard drive.
Would another hard drive (external or internal) be a better choice than tape?
If tape then what is a cost effective solution?

 

[gwichman]

Well what are your backup requirements?

Do you just want 1 copy of your data backed up some place in case the drive dies?

What kind of data are you backing up? source code? database? mp3's? be specific..

Theres a big difference between backing up your personal file system and backing up an oracle database. If you give us an idea of what the data is and what the server's role is, we can offer suggestions on what would be best for your situation.

Is this just a personal PC or an actual production server?

 

[pnrenton]

A single PC with 240 GB in a Raid 0 array. I'd like to do a total system backup.

 

[2ffat]

To be perfectly paranoid, do a backup to an external hard drive that is kept offsite and then to a tape backup.

The reality of this is the expense and your time. You have to buy, set up, and administer two sets of backups. If your data is extremely critcal, then the expense and time are worth it. If not, buy a good tape backup system. For the size of your hard drive you should look at something like LTO which holds 100 uncompressed/200 compressed GB of data with 250 - 500 BG coming soon.

If you prefer another hard drive, which would be faster, I would strongly suggest an external drive. If the HD controller for the internal drive goes down then the external drive "should" be safe.
James P. Cottingham

When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute and it's longer than any hour. That's relativity.
[tab][tab]Albert Einstein explaining his Theory of Relativity to a group of journalists.

 

[gwichman]

I don't know how you can give recommendations without having any real idea what the user's backup requirements are. He didnt answer any of my questions and for all you know he could be a home PC user who simply wants to have a backup of his system. On the other hand it oculd be a 24x7 production DB server that can't afford downtime.

pnrenton - bottom line is if you don't answer questions when they're asked then expect a suitably lame answer to your question. What should you use for backup based on what you've told us? Hell use whatever you want! HD, tape, DVD, they'll all have a copy of your data right? no prob then!

 

[bytehd]

cheapest:
buy IDE 120s or SATA 120s with $10 removable trays.
Ghost is fast
does my 120GB at 850MB/min

http://www.insyncva.com

 

[BackupGurus]

First off, we're in accordance with everyone else that the author should provide more detail concerning the requirements for backups. Specifically, the backup timeframe, actual data size (Gb used), and types must be considered in order to provide accurate suggestions.

However, we'd argue that an offsite backup method is imperative. Disk to Disk (D2D) backups alone are a recipe for disaster. One power surge could destroy both your primary and secondary drives.

We'd suggest tape, D2D backups with trays, or online file storage for your backup needs.

Tape:
VXA-Based Drives or VS 160 Based Drives

Advantages: Very portable, ability to rotate media in order to create redundancy or data history, low cost for long-term data storage

Disadvantages: High TCO with limited media use, slower backup speeds

Cost: From $900 for a VXA-2 (160 Gb Compressed) drive to 2.5K for a VS 160 Autoloader

D2D With Trays:
Secondary disks with removable trays

Advantages: High speed, low upfront and ongoing cost, high capacity backups

Disadvantages: Not very portable, only one or few revisions of your data history, a single point of failure.

Cost: From About $150 (Depends widely on trays used and disk capacity

Online backups:
Store your critical data files on the Internet

Advantages: Extremely portable, ability to access data remotely, unlimited data history capabilities, the best method of disaster recovery

Disadvantages: Speed-Even broadband networks can't compete with tape or D2D speeds

Cost: Widely varies but many plans start at about $5 monthly.


Support Team

http://www.easiestfilesystem.com

 

[bytehd]

This is obviously a vendor or ASP trying to sell you their solution.
Disk to Disk is not a single point of failure.
Mainframes have used raid packs for years.
When the disk is in another place, there is your other point.
Its the cheapest and fastest way to go.

http://www.insyncva.com

 

[BackupGurus]

Ok, we are an ASP; however, our recommendation isn't so much a sales pitch as it is common sense.

Varying levels of RAID always suffer from the risk of a double-drive failure. If you loose your parity drive on RAID1 and still have your data drive then you're OK. Loose both and you're toast. Even RAID5 suffers from a double-disk loss for data loss. Loose your parity drive plus another and you're toast.

That's common sense and our support team has seen this multiple times in production environments from Sun SAN storage arrays to Compaq servers with local drives...it's a simple flaw of RAID design that you can't escape.

Offsite backups are imperative for whatever solution you choose. Keeping all of your data, in historic revisions, on local disks is a long-term recipe for disaster.

Support Team

http://www.easiestfilesystem.com

 

[dkediger]

Correct - RAID is not a backup strategy. D2D using swappable RAID packs is, I would guess, a bit beyond what the original poster is seeking - which we still don't know what kind of coverage he is seeking.