Sujet : Re: My First HDD Failure (I Think)
De : ff (at) *nospam* linux.rocks (Farley Flud)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacyDate : 27. Nov 2024, 21:44:17
Autres entêtes
Organisation : UsenetExpress - www.usenetexpress.com
Message-ID : <pan$e2c0c$c8752a7$2eba0bdd$9fdfa6f2@linux.rocks>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 02:15:05 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
I understood that what he offered took care of speed and volume nicely,
but not the safety. I could not make sure each backup is placed on a new
media or each disk there contains more than one backup. If a disk, any
disk, is accessed all the time, it will crash one day.
>
Wrong.
The entire concept of RAID is to ensure data integrity (i.e. safety)
through redundancy.
In vallor's example, 8 drives would have to fail SIMULTANEOUSLY
for data to be lost, and the probability of that occurrence would
be EXTREMELY small.
You should adopt a RAID system with maybe 3-5 drives. This system
would be on-line continuously and you could backup your data in a
continuous fashion.
If desired, you could then backup to a more permanent storage
at regular intervals.
RAID is used everywhere when data integrity is essential.
I don't use it because my data is more of the "library"
model where weekly or even monthly backups are acceptable.
-- Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.