Re: User-oriented backup tools
On Thursday 16 February 2017 05:08:34 Francesco Porro wrote:
> On 16/02/2017 01:02, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Very simple: amanda
>
> Well, Amanda looks a bit too complex for my typical home needs, and
> seems to me more server,centralized-backup oriented. However it seems
> also very powerful and flexible, so I'll keep it into account for the
> future. Thanks!
>
> > Cheers, Gene Heskett
>
> Cheers!
Well, I am used to it. And I've been using it here, first with 1 machine
and tapes, but that got outgrown as the machines were added, and many
years ago I discovered 2 things (I've used it since 1998)
1. Common hard drives are 5000x more dependable than tapes.
2. Common hard drives are 1/10 to 1/100th the cost of tapes & tape
drives.
I am not a business, needing long term storage, so an $80 terabyte drive,
formatted for 30 virtual tapes, used one a night, is as long as I need
to retain data.
So now I am backing up 5 machines, mostly the stuff associated with the
machining arts, two lathes and two milling machines, and this machine to
that terabyte drive. That drive now has 65000+ spinning hours on it, but
smartctl tools have alerted me in time to go get a replacement so no
data has been lost in better than a decade.
And because the hard drives are random access, if I accidentally nuke a
file I need, recovery is a few minutes operation, more time is wasted as
I go thru the monkey business of looking up how to do the recovery, the
actual recovery once its setup, is a 5 minute job.
What can I say, its "comfortable" to me. But its a far cry from the only
way.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
Reply to: