On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 03:46:46 PDT, "Karsten M. Self" writes: >on Sun, Aug 12, 2001 at 02:46:42AM -0700, patrick q (rpmq@yahoo.com) wrote: >> I have a lot of important archives, up to 10,000 files per ~10 Meg >> tar.gz tarball, that I like to keep as safe as possible. >> >> I test the archives when I create them, have backups, and off-site >> backups of backups, but I am worried about possible file corruption, ie >> propagating possibly corrupt files through the backup rotation. >> >> Would it not be better to compress the files individually first and >> then tar them into an archive instead of the normal tar.gz operation, >> to have the best chance of recovering as many files as possible? <...> >Your best bet is multiple, redundant, backups, with full verification. <...> AOL. It may also be worth it to not build an archive (with whatever method) and then propagate it through the cycle, but to make one archive to be stored on-site, and create an extra one to be stored off-site, best at another time and/or interval. I have several customers where a nightly backup goes off-site and another one is done around noon to be stored on-site. Off-site backups are tar.bz2 (for space reasons), on-site plain dump. If one method fails there´s always the other one. cheers, &rw -- -- Prof: So the American government went to IBM to come up with -- a data encryption standard and they came up with ... -- Student: EBCDIC! ----
Attachment:
pgpoF4zUCgwv3.pgp
Description: PGP signature