Re: IDE DAT Drive?
On 2000-11-23 09:20, Robert Davies wrote:
> Do you REALLY have 300G of things that need to be backed up?
> If so the solution is a DLT robot. But most people who think that they
have
>that much data to backup aren't doing things effectively.
I sure do, I wish I hadn't and it's growing 1GB a week. Unfortunately the
archives get updated,
so I can't even freeze parts of it, it all has to be online 24/7.
Russel, it wasn't me with the backup problem, though of course I have many,
but I've not needed to call in Curtis Preston yet... yet anyway ;)
> Don't backup news spools!!!
> Don't backup email as it takes too long to backup and changes too fast.
Add squid cache's and the like to that.
>>> Oh, don't backup user's mail directories. They change so much that a
>>>backup that's more than 1 day old is probably useless.
>>
>>This may upset users when they loose days worth of email, that they were
>>unable to download,
>>or had left on the server, because they were travelling.
>
>If you have a serious failure then users will be upset regardless. If you
>use a mail server such as Netscape's mail server then due to it's databases
>you would have to restore while the server is offline. Recently I was
>working for a large ISP (>750K users) and I estimated that it would take 10
>days to complete a backup of email. If email takes 10 days to restore then
>you are better to dump it. If it takes 5 days to restore then it's
probably
>best dumped. How fast should a restore be to be worth-while?
In that case yes, but I find it scary that they have all their eggs in one
basket. Prefer a divide and conquer approach, have enough problems with
Oracle DBs where it's all or nothing, most times.
>I had a big discussion on this topic with my former colleagues. They
>couldn't understand why backing up a mail spool (tens of millions of small
>files) would be slower than backing up a web server (tens of thousands of
>mall files, a few really big log files, and the OS).
If you've that many files in a mail spool then you have problems.
> would recommend SCSI for this type of thing. Setting up tape drives is
> oblematic enough without going through the issues of companies that
produce
> w quality versions of the parts for IDE. Also compared to the cost of
> tapes the cost of a SCSI controller is nothing.
Yep, though Matt could comfort himself with the though that the Onstream IDE
has been used successfully and discussed on the Linux kernel mailing list.
Rob
Reply to: