Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ameel

HDDs Clicking

Recommended Posts

While on the topic of backups/HDDs failing, I wanted to ask something not totally unrelated.

Is there any good software for file versioning for windows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you're kinda talking about windows 'previous version' features. Normally reserved for servers and the like.

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/11130/resto...n-of-windows-7/

If you're going to 'mirror' a drive, can I suggest a Sync instead, like I do?

 

I do 48 hour syncs. This gives me personally 2 advantages.

1. I wont lose much, as my file server is media, meaning its usually replaceable.

2. If I delete something from Drive1, I have 48 hours to realise I wanted it and copy it back before the sync takes place.

 

Some of my drives have even fallen back to 'weekly' syncs now.

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the RAID being bad assertions, I have to disagree.

 

You are not "safer" by not having a RAID. That's about as ridiculous as believing a RAID is as good as a backup.

 

A RAID will allow you to expand your storage beyond a single drive giving you capacity. Depending of the level of RAID you setup you have the ability to lose a drive (or more) physically and still keep going. Add in hot spare support and there is greater redundancy. This thread should highlight this considering he has had two drives going south and should he simply replace them and let the RAID rebuild he will save a bucketload of time. The backup is always important if things go south of course.

 

Treating a RAID properly with monitoring means you don't have to go through the process of restoring from your backup. The backup is there of course but when you are serving more than just yourself, downtime is a PITA and RAID goes a long way to help reducing the need for that.

 

It's also an advantage when dealing with data location. Say you have 4 TB of ... TV shows for example. Single drives mean having to allocate some stuff on one and some stuff on the other and know which drive has what. Do you do it alphabetically and split it? You would have to create two shares to access it. Having it all in one pool makes much more sense.

 

In regards to backups with versioning, I don't know much about Linux solutions (although I am about to start investigating them - rsnapshot looks like an interesting contender). I currently have two backup boxes that get physically swapped out every couple of weeks. I Rsync nightly to them and have been using ZFS snapshots on my main server in case I do something a little silly and accidentally delete something I shouldn't have.

Edited by The Tick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A RAID will allow you to expand your storage beyond a single drive giving you capacity. Depending of the level of RAID you setup you have the ability to lose a drive (or more) physically and still keep going. Add in hot spare support and there is greater redundancy. This thread should highlight this considering he has had two drives going south and should he simply replace them and let the RAID rebuild he will save a bucketload of time. The backup is always important if things go south of course.

I have to agree. 2 of them HDDs just died. Cannot find any partition whatsoever, just gone. 2 others are failing and got bad sectors. In the end I have a fair bit of HDD to RMA, but RAID 6 provided great redundancy.

 

It's not realistic for me to backup ALL my data. I backup the ESSENTIAL things (only a few hundreds of GBs really), and although I know I run the risk of losing all my data (which happened to me so many times before when I did not have redundancy), RAID is still better than zero protection. Like I said, it's not realistic for me to backup 20tb or data, but 2tb of Data is OK to backup. So yeah, the redundancy IS a good thing (as proven in my circumstances)

 

 

In regards to backups with versioning, I don't know much about Linux solutions (although I am about to start investigating them - rsnapshot looks like an interesting contender). I currently have two backup boxes that get physically swapped out every couple of weeks. I Rsync nightly to them and have been using ZFS snapshots on my main server in case I do something a little silly and accidentally delete something I shouldn't have.

Looking for a Windows solution actually. Want something flexible that ideally could do the following (although maybe not realistic, but who knows?):

1. file versioning local hdd

2. file versioning on network drives

3. full data backup of selected folders on local hdd

4. full data backup of selected folders on network drives

5. backup of selected folders to cloud (dropbox, box, etc)

Edited by ameel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the RAID being bad assertions, I have to disagree.

 

You are not "safer" by not having a RAID. That's about as ridiculous as believing a RAID is as good as a backup.

 

A RAID will allow you to expand your storage beyond a single drive giving you capacity. Depending of the level of RAID you setup you have the ability to lose a drive (or more) physically and still keep going. Add in hot spare support and there is greater redundancy. This thread should highlight this considering he has had two drives going south and should he simply replace them and let the RAID rebuild he will save a bucketload of time. The backup is always important if things go south of course.

 

Treating a RAID properly with monitoring means you don't have to go through the process of restoring from your backup. The backup is there of course but when you are serving more than just yourself, downtime is a PITA and RAID goes a long way to help reducing the need for that.

 

It's also an advantage when dealing with data location. Say you have 4 TB of ... TV shows for example. Single drives mean having to allocate some stuff on one and some stuff on the other and know which drive has what. Do you do it alphabetically and split it? You would have to create two shares to access it. Having it all in one pool makes much more sense.

 

In regards to backups with versioning, I don't know much about Linux solutions (although I am about to start investigating them - rsnapshot looks like an interesting contender). I currently have two backup boxes that get physically swapped out every couple of weeks. I Rsync nightly to them and have been using ZFS snapshots on my main server in case I do something a little silly and accidentally delete something I shouldn't have.

You do realise how unnecessarily complicated it is for the average user to have raid and, to make sure it does not fail and cause data loss. You own response above shows that, as ali said leave raid for specialised solutions. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not realistic for me to backup ALL my data. I backup the ESSENTIAL things (only a few hundreds of GBs really), and although I know I run the risk of losing all my data (which happened to me so many times before when I did not have redundancy), RAID is still better than zero protection. Like I said, it's not realistic for me to backup 20tb or data, but 2tb of Data is OK to backup. So yeah, the redundancy IS a good thing (as proven in my circumstances)

Yeah, I know that feeling - trying to weigh up what's important and what isn't.

 

20TB of data is a mean feat to backup.

 

I know that on my backup boxes, I build them with the biggest drives I can afford and simply go with small partition of OS and the balance of that drive, and all the other drives configured under one big LVM. No redundancy but the space is what's important on those boxes.

 

Generally though, I am backing up closer to 8TB rather than 20TB. I think I'd have a big problem going to that level.

 

Looking for a Windows solution actually. Want something flexible that ideally could do the following (although maybe not realistic, but who knows?):

1. file versioning local hdd

2. file versioning on network drives

3. full data backup of selected folders on local hdd

4. full data backup of selected folders on network drives

5. backup of selected folders to cloud (dropbox, box, etc)

Not too sure. Most backups I do for local systems are usually handled with something like Acronis.

 

Have you looked at Crashplan for cloud backups? I haven't tried their free local backup stuff so I am not sure how it works. Their online one is pretty good and I have a few clients using them now.

http://www.crashplan.com/consumer/crashplan.html

 

You do realise how unnecessarily complicated it is for the average user to have raid and, to make sure it does not fail and cause data loss. You own response above shows that, as ali said leave raid for specialised solutions. :)

That would depend on what they are running it on. A NAS offering RAID is pretty simple actually and a home user could easily set it up and have it monitor and tell them when something is going screwy. A Linux server on the other hand well yeah, leave it to people who know what they are doing. My response above doesn't suggest it always being complicated and there is merit in having a pool of smaller drives, expanding the capacity and introducing some redundancy. :)

Edited by The Tick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Atomicians, RAID 10 is the go if you can afford the lost Pr0n space :/

 

Why I like RAID 1. User A has a hdd die, machine keeps on ticking along ..... some of them don't even notice if they never reboot or have alerts on the raid software.

 

Multiple external backup drives (at least 3), User has a fire/theft of the server. One of the backups is offsite at all times. Hardware independent restore them onto a loan server and they are up and running in no time.

 

The number of IDE hard drive users, walking in with a dead drive, then saying I have to have the data back is still happening YEARS after IDE should have all gone in the recycle bin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically I have 15 drives in the setup.

What the hell are you storing on there? That is epic data!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×