Raid 1 - do I need backup software

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by 4now, Oct 23, 2008.

  1. 4now macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    #1
    I'm trying to find an easy solution to backups for a photography studio.

    I don't know much about Raid.

    But I'm looking at a LaCie 2TB (2 swappable drives)
    so I assume that is 2x 1TB

    Can it be set up so that I use the external for the Aperture library (maximum 1TB of files)
    And that is automatically copied to the other disk.

    Does this work
    Is it safe?

    The photographers are not finding Retrospect very easy - and it often fails

    thanks so much
     
  2. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #2
    Yes this is easy to do. Either use the RAID 1 Box or two normal external drives and do the RAD 1 in software

    Yes it works. It is not un-safe but it adds very little additional safety over simply using one external disk drive. RAID is NOT a backup plan.

    That is likely because they lack a technical/computer background. Retrospect is easy to set up if you have the required background. Many people don't. Apple answered this problem with Time Machine. It does some of what retrospect does but with not much effort to set up and use.

    If you are using Aperture it has a very nice built-in backup system called "vaults".

    When you develop your backup plan you need to list all the way you can loose data in rough order of likelihood. Some of the ways are
    1. Operator error.
    2. Software error corupts files
    3. Lightening strike on nearby utility pole fries equipment
    4. house fire
    5. theft of computer equipment
    6. hard drive fails

    If your plan follow these two rules you will be well ahead of most people and your data may be safe fro a long time:
    1. Always have three copies of the data, each on different physical media (even while a backup operation is in progress, which means you might need four copies)
    2. The data should always exist in at least two different geographical locations )even while transporting data to the off-site location)
     
  3. mrgreen4242 macrumors 601

    mrgreen4242

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    #3
    This is somewhat false. RAID is indeed a backup plan. It's not the best one, but it is a backup plan. It will NOT protect you from accidental file deletions, but it WILL protect you from drive failure. Using Apple software, Aperture and iPhoto, accidental file deletion is a pretty small chance, since original files aren't altered by the software, and the application manages your library internally, so deleted files are moved to a trash bin, and you have several chances to not delete them.

    That said, it's not a foolproof system. However, as you mention TimeMachine is pretty darn good. It protects you from accidental file deletions and modifications, but not hardware failure. For that reason, I would recommend you use a 1TB RAID 1 as your Time Machine target device.

    That means you'll need another 1TB drive for your active files, though. This will cover you about 99% of the time. It won't cover you if your house burns down, is robbed, etc etc.

    Offsite backup is, as you suggest a good idea, but not always required. If you do want to utilize an offsite backup, I recommend trying a Flickr Pro accoutn and setting up an Applescript to copy your photos to it as you download them from your camera. You get unlimited storage of photos for $25 per year, which is an amazing value.

    Downside is it can't store RAW files. However, since this is a last resort backup system, being able to recover your original full res JPGs is a pretty decent option if somehow all three drives fail, your house is moved to another county by a tornado, you get robbed and all the drives are stolen, or whatever freak occurrence you can think of strikes.
     
  4. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #4
    Back up options

    Seems like a lot of good information is being offered here but you need to tell more about what system you are using.

    If you are going with an external back up setup, there are a lot of options available out there and a few caveats as well to consider.

    My graphic station is an older Mac Pro quad 2.66. I have internally three drives raided (for work) and a 4th drive that I back up the entire system to and also am able to boot up on that 4th drive if the raid goes bad or needs an EFI update. I own Retrospect and also a lower end back up software called Superduper which I now prefer. It allows a master back up and then just "refresh" of the back up of any changes to my raid (deletions, additional files and modified files). I also use a network storage unit that houses 4 drives in Raid 5.

    If you want an external back up, the two options are directly attached storage (as discussed) or a Network Attached Storage (NAS).

    Directly attached storage can be a simple usb/firewire back up to external drives or, if you have a Mac Pro you can put in a SATA card and run external drives much faster. (Raided or unraided depending on the card).

    Option 1 - directly attached storage

    Lots of choices there. I would opt for a mirrored unit that has both firewire and usb as options for connectivity. Firewire I believe is a better choice for larger amounts of data or sized files. However, some newer laptops by Apple have dropped firewire leaving USB as an option. OWC has some very good diskless storage units and you can populate them with 1.5 terabyte drives yourself. Often drives go on sale and thats the time to buy.
    Check this one out as example-
    http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/usb/raid_1/Gmax

    An alternative to the above is a 4 drive unit called a "Drobo." It is a raided system that attaches directly to your computer via USB (newer model does also firewire). It is set to protect data and in that does its version of Raid 5 which is designed to work even if one drive fails.

    Option 2 - NAS

    Network Attached Storage for a Studio is a great way to work if your computers are wired or wireless to a network. In this multiple computers can share the storage unit. It can also be set up to interface to the outside world if you need to access from a remote area (careful that its set properly for your protection). NAS can be as simple as a single drive unit, 2 drive unit mirrored or 3 drives and up for Raid 5. These are not always cheap.
    A low end two drive unit that you can populate yourself can be as simple as the offering from DLINK 3xx series.

    If I had to set a studio up it would include both set ups.
    Major non-mobile systems would get local external back up or internal for MAC Pro, all others would use the NAS as their back up. The former would from time to time be backed up to the NAS as well. In a business world, you should also store data off site meaning a location that is not your studio in case of disaster. A relatively cheap way to do this is have two external devices that are rotated at the studio and then you take one home.

    Am I confusing you? <grin> it does get kind of messy.

    NAS advantage - centralized backups, can be faced to the outside world as needed, 2+ drive versions offer data protection against drive failure. more
    NAS disadvantage - can get expensive (business cost hmm), sometimes accessing them over a network can be problematic for MACs if not set correctly, and last SLOWER to write to than direct attached storage but reads are usually fine.

    Hope this gives you some useful things to think about. If you are just wanting to get things started and will build later your dream set up, again check out OWC or other stores that offer mirrored units for directly attached storage and later add a NAS to your studio.

    - Phrehdd
     
  5. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #5
    Redundant RAID setups aren't really meant to act a backup system - they're meant to provide maximum data availability. It's been shown that after one RAID disk failure there's a significantly better-than-random chance of another disk in that array failing in a similar manner.
     
  6. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #6
    If I had a dollar for every time I saw two drives fail at the same time, I'd have a few thousand dollar. Plus, your backups should really go to a different physical location than your primary data.

    If it's important enough to back up, it's important enough to back up correctly.
     
  7. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #7
    Wow, I don't think I've seen that many drives fail ever. At once or not.

    I think there are still good reasons to use RAID. For example if you need a "disk" that is larger than the largest drive you can buy. If you needed 5TB you'd be forced to go with RAID. Also RAID can be more reliable. Not fool proof but still more reliable than a single drive. The other reason to use RAID does not apply to backup systems. That is if you need a faster "disk". RAID can be configured to be very fast.

    In short, you'd used RAID when you can't buy a single disk that has the specs you need. Those needed specs might be MTBF, Size or speed.

    If a single drive would work and you want more redundancy then buy two single drives and rotate them. With rotated drives there is less change of a correlated failure.
     
  8. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #8
    Maybe you don't get out much? ;)

    I've been doing IT for a very long time, I've seen pretty-much everything several times over. Head crashes, bearing failures, filter failures, liquid spills, firmware errors on hardware RAID cards, power spikes on SCSI buses, power spikes through system PSUs, data center power filters hooked up backwards to protect the mains from the spikes the data center might generate, motor failures, file system corruption on unclean shutdown, and I can't count the number of times I've seen operations staff miss the fact that one drive failed until the second failure killed the system on RAID 5 servers...

    Heck, I was alpha geek at a multi-billion dollar media company when the IBM "sticktion" problem hit, while we had about a 10% actual failure rate, we replaced somewhere around 685 drives company-wide in a two week period (the failures were generally after a power-cycle, so multiple drive failures were common.) With around 125 data centers you see a lot of hardware failures if you don't get shiny new hardware pretty often, and you generally get the call only after the second drive has gone- played that game for 8.5 years. Heck way back when in my first two years in the Army, we played "take the computers into the field during exercises" in the largest division in the Army- we even couldn't move our two main mainframe systems because of hardware failures due to damage during maneuvers.

    I've replaced a handful of controller cards on IDE/SATA drives doing computer forensics too- lots of people trust hard drives a lot more than I do- but lots of people end up paying me to do data recovery too...

    I'm doing *a lot* less operational stuff now, and I've seen four RAID 5 failures in a two month period this year (5 drives x3, 2 drives x1-) coupled with tape backup failures on two occasions- and I've got a friend who's sent back 6 drives in the last six weeks (Samsung 1Ts that don't seem to play well with a SATA RAID controller.) So, that's 17 drives I've handled directly in a short time-frame.
     
  9. elcid macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #9
    "Put all of your stuff on a Drobo"


    http://www.drobo.com/twip/



    Granted I havent read everything suggested here, but it is worth a shot if you are trying to reliably back something up.
     
  10. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #10
    An "easy solution"

    If I recall, the question was about an easy solution for a photo studio.

    We can all talk about horror stories of drive failure in a home, soho and corp. The question is what is available for a studio.

    If there is concern about drive failure in an external storage device, then consider either directly attached or NAS style raid 6. This gives you two drives in case of failure instead of one. Additionally, look into a box that allows for a "spare" drive to be in the system. If a drive fails, the spare is made available (sometimes automatically and sometimes you have to initiate it). Any time you replace a drive in raid 5/6, expect a long rebuild time. If one is paranoid enough, they can put several 1.5 terabyte drives out there and have them all contain the same data (incase of failure). Some can be taken off site, rotated on site etc.

    .... So what hardware (computers) are in this studio?

    All said and done, it doesn't have to be complicated. Just that one should be aware of pitfalls and eventual issues. If you get a mirrored storage unit whether direct or NAS, keep extra drives on hand for replacement.

    I admit I failed to mention that a good UPS (uninterrupted power supply) is very important to protect your data, computers, storage equipment etc. They not only provide power via battery for outages but the better ones can help protect against surges. Most surges btw, happen when power is returned after an outage. Some UPS can be made to handshake with Computers and NAS so that when on battery power, they will gracefully shut down the systems for you.

    As for the mention of Drobo it's a nice little unit with its own set of issues. I do like however that unlike NAS, you can choose a file format. Seems that they didn't (in the past) make it that easy for Mac users and the like. Perhaps it has changed. Being that its raid is proprietary, you are stuck with it if things go wrong and you want to move your raid elsewhere. There is no upward path presently for Drobo. Two models only, 4 drives max and a low speed attachment to make it behave as a NAS.

    IMO - if you only have one computer, get the direct attached storage with as large a drive(s) as you can afford. Go with a mirrored unit. If you have multiple computers, opt for a NAS as well. Choose a method to take your data off site. (Here is where the Drobo might be handy).

    - Phrehdd

    Mac Pro quad 2.66, 9 gigs RAM, ATI 1900, 4-1tb drives internal, blu ray rw
    iMac 2 ghrtz, 250 gig drive
    Multiple external direct attach storage devices (collected over time)
    Photoshop CS3, Lightroom 2, Lightzone, Capture One, AI Silverfast, more
    Minolta Elite 5400 scanner
    Epson 750 flatbed scanner
    QNAP 409pro NAS (4x1tb)
    Cinteq 21" Wacom tablet
    (Yes I do photo restoration and digitizing of negs/slides presently. Years ago, I spent over a decade doing professional photog and at times taught b/w darkroom and cibachrome printing)

    Corp background - IT Systems Analyst, Technical Lead, Project Manager related to Desktop, infrastructure, Server Farms, Information Security.
    DOS, Windows 3.1-Vista, OS/2 2x-3x, light Unix/Linux and last OSX.
    (I have seen my share of system failures at all levels too)
     
  11. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #11
    As the others have pointed out a RAID is not a backup! Yes, it's complicated to work out a backup solution that suits your needs and gives you adequate protection. But so is working out your taxes for that photostudio. Or organizing your paperwork and do your billing, but the latter are considered no-brainers if you have a business. A study among small and medium-sized companies has shown that something like 70 % go bust if they suffer from catastrophic data failure.

    There are many ways to backup, here is a backup solution from a photographer from another forum: he charges his clients for a harddrive (which are very cheap). The active projects are on a large harddrive/RAID which is backed up. The inactive projects get put on individual harddrives. If the inactive projects drives die, they do so independently and you theoretically don't lose all your data. On the other hand, harddrives do not keep data as long as tapes, for example, but they are more easily accessible. I'm not saying this solution is ideal, but it is relatively inexpensive, easy to implement and gives you a good level of security (where you distinguish between active and inactive projects).

    A backup solution has to be part of a storage solution (sounds like big words, but it's usually quite simple). The following points need to be worked out:
    (1) How much data do you have and what kind of data is it? How much of the data changes? Prioritize your data! (E. g. your music is probably not as essential as your work-related documents.) Does part of the data have a `shelf life' after which it becomes `inactive' of rarely used?
    (2) By how much is your data growing per month?
    (3) What level of security do you want to have for what data?

    A simple and cheap example:
    (1) Time Machine can take care of the backups for your work-related data and system drive. With Time Machine, you always can restore your drive to a bootable state and to an arbitrary backup point in time. If you want extra safety for certain documents, you can use Synk or another backup tool to backup data onto different drives. Or you could clone your Time Machine volume in regular intervals and put the second drive offsite. Do not use RAID1 for this!
    (2) Put your photo projects onto a separate volume; these days, 1 TB drives aren't really expensive. If you need more than 2 TB per volume, you probably need to invest in a hardware RAID5. You can back this up to a Drobo for instance. While the Drobo isn't a pro-grade RAID solution and not fast, it should get the job done and is comparatively affordable.
    (3) Copy inactive projects onto their dedicated harddrives for storage. Store these harddrives offsite.

    - Note that your backup volume always has to be larger than the volume you backup from!
    - If a volume is 80 % full, look into adding storage!
     
  12. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #12
    First, I appreciate all of your post. Well done.

    Second, the original topic was a photo studio and an "easy" solution.

    There is a huge difference between a corporate style backup/storage solution and a studio.
    The challenge here is between optimizing vs maximizing. They are not the same.

    A studio set up would need the notion of a backup and content management. In today's world
    they are often integrated. Content management means simply easy access to an "archive."

    A photographer may work on a job, finish it, and close out the project. All data (photo files etc)
    are then archived. A photographer during the project may want to back up the data for safety.

    An "easy" solution is one that can serve as an archive and be a part of storage/backup/disaster recovery model.

    For those that chide "raid" and pull the "IT" card <grin>, we will disagree and so will lots of smaller businesses including
    photo studios. In fact some large corps found it is far easier to take network share data backup to a large raid and then
    let their tape systems (for off site) read the raid so as not to slow down the shares for 24/7 businesses. (yes raid is used).

    The smallest unit of back up in a hard drive world is a single drive. When the drive fails you might try a third party that
    can try to lift data off the broken drive and it may or may not work. Dollars and time lost.

    A mirrored drive can at least cover a failed drive. So as far as a single direct or network storage, a mirrored drive is the minimum.

    As mentioned, a good solution might be local storage and off site storage. Local storage can be redundant. You may opt for a shared
    storage that is also an archive (library) and simply copy it to a 2nd unit that is not accessed regularly. (Some of you would simply call this the "real" backup.)

    Not to digress to far - In the earlier days of raid, it was designed to speed up access to pools of data and later for writes. Drives were expensive, smaller and with shorter lives. As well, they were racked and could not be transported easily (including drives being damaged from shock). Those days are long gone and of course raid has been made available to any computer user as has the option for a backup. Raid can and is being used as part of storage solutions including the subset of backup staging and disaster recovery. As there are different types of raid the question is which one serves your needs faithfully. My personal experience include disaster recovery for large biz, tape systems (manual rotation and automated service), fireboxed drives/tapes, internet backups residing in other states than the company location and so forth.

    An easy solution should include restore or access to data. Thus the archive facet is important. There are softwares that create libraries for photographers and similar that serve as archive and fast access, logically catalogued systems.

    in a studio - it might be computer to NAS, NAS backed up for off site. That is "EASY" and optimized for studio needs.
    The NAS might be a mirror, raid 6 or whatever; providing protection against hardware failure. The question then is
    does one have a local backup of the NAS or allow off site function to be the back up directly.

    Time machine btw is a hybrid function tool. It does do a backup and it also creates a recursive state on files. (Similar to word processors that do "snapshot" backups every few minutes of a document in progress). If that drive fails ..well...you know <G>.
    A mirrored drive would have made far more sense. (yes raid)

    Photo files can build up very fast. Even the 1.5 tera drives within a year or two are not sufficient (drives shouldn't be taxed beyond 75-80 percent capacity).

    So again its about optimizing not maximizing. Easy doesn't mean high risk..it means a solution that takes into account the end user's needs and functions of service.

    As there are variations of a theme, one could simply have incremental backups or deltas between a NAS (raided or not) and off site location storage.

    If it makes you more comfortable - call it local machine, data library/pool/archives, off site "backup"

    - Phrehdd
     
  13. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #13
    No, the original question was does the OP need backup software if they use RAID 1. To lose sight of that is to lose sight of the problem set.

    No, the only difference is the price of the hardware and software and the level of risk one may be willing to assume because af a lack of trained staff. In essence, a backup solution is a backup solution- take your data, and put it in more than one physical place- doesn't matter if you're selling planters or plutonium. In fact, you'll find that when IP is your core business, the criticality of safe data actually increases versus when hard goods are your core business.

    No, the challenge is between resources and capability- with scant resources capabilities are lesser, and finding that balance is a measure of risk acceptance.

    I know plenty of folks who back up without content management as a part of the backup soluition- in point of fact, it gets increasingly more expensive to do content management as a part of a backup process, and that brings with it additional complexity which may not be important overall if your storage structure contains your content management stream (for instance project names/dates are in your filesystem hierarchy.) Also, if you use a CMS that simply references files in their native locations with their original names, then your backup solution need have no notion of any of it, you can simply restore your library, or a subdirectory of it and the CMS will still reference the same location.

    Your idea of content management may be "simple access to an archive," but there are many people to whom it means a great many more things, such as revision control, licensing, formatting, channelized sales streams, meta data control, workflow automation, access control, edition tracking...

    If you wait to "finish" a project before you back up, then your data is at risk in the intervening period. For many content creators, this is an unacceptable risk. I'd argue that any studio workflow should start with a backup of any new files before post-processing. I've had customers lose "backup CDs" within an hour of getting them.

    My own workflow doesn't have me reusing a memory card until the images on it are in at least two locations or three different devices in one location. For some that's overkill, but I have yet to lose an image since I implemented it.

    There is a difference between an archive and a backup. If your data all lives in one place, you are taking a risk that's insurmountable if it actualizes.

    I'll happily disagree- but if you're one of the four small businesses who had RAID failues this year, you'd be one of the ones buying an actual backup system no matter what your size ;)

    No, in that case it's not used for redundancy- you could use any disk system (or flash, or RAM for that matter- just because it goes on a RAID doesn't mean that the Redundant part of RAID gets used- for the purpose is just to cache (and frankly few of the large commercial and government clients I deal with do so anymore, as fiber channel to a disk unit from the backup system works just fine without slowing anything down- I'm installing one in a large Government lab next month- nobody wanted to go from the storage device to a secondary array then off to tape with modern devices.)

    In any case, reading the data takes just about as long per-element no matter if you're writing the results to tape or disk- and depending on your OS, filesystem and data layout, going to a slower, less-buffered medium can actually give you a performance advantage as you'll have fewer track misses due to the backup monopolizing the heads on the source drive if you're doing a lot of read seeks for small blocks of data. Non-Server OSX/HFS+ is particularly bad for this in my experience- copying off to a RAID tends to bring things to a standstill because the copy gets all the attention.

    You are assuming that all hard drive failures are hardware- that's not always true, filesystem failures still happen, even in today's world of journaled filesystems. In the case of a HW failure that's not just the controller card, OnTrack tends to come in at several thousand dollars per drive for a clean-room recovery- and that's filesystem-accessible data only- not a forensically sound image to recover things like deleted or scrambled images. Obviously, this can be a cost covered by insurance- but it's not cheap at all, and you can actually have gigabytes less recovered than you started with (it's happened in three of my cases so far, and we generally don't have to deal with damaged hardware in discovery motions.)

    More importantly, a mirror is a single point of recovery (so long as it's a straight mirror, not a striped one.) That generally means there's more chance of recovering more data if there's a failure, more easily and cheaply than trying to re-build a striped RAID set (which often requires the same HW, making it especially expensive in the event of a burst pipe or other "killed the controller too" types of events.

    Actually, we would call off-site storage a best common practice in terms of data availability, business continuity and lowest risk. Like most business decisions, one should really ask themselves if they can afford to deviate from a BCP, rather than the reverse.

    Not to belabor a point, but your history is incorrect- RAID stands for Redundant Array of *Inexpensive* Disks. Disks in a RAID array were cheap compared to the cost of storage on mainframes and minicomputers of the day. Having bought disks from the old 2314 packs through to 3390's on mainframes, I can remember the ROI calculations being so far on the RAID site it wasn't funny- that's how Netware made it into the data center- buying the server, OS, network hardware and RAID didn't come close to the expense of "real" disk on a mainframe or minicomputer.

    While today's disks are better protected from shock, those days are hardly long-gone. Laptops are subject to far more shocks than the computers of the past, and not all laptops have great drive protection (and folks like photographers who tend to do laptop harddrive upgrades rarely look for the expensive shock-protected drives.)

    I had one forensic case last year where drive damage was a factor and one side had to settle instead of fight because of it (laptop "accidentally dropped off a table" when running.)

    Actually, it needn't be- you can pull a drive off a hot swappable mirror set,
    put in a new drive and let the mirror rebuild- no archive necessary. You're still at the mercy of a backup medium that's significantly more fragile than tape, but with fewer issues than say DVDs or even CDs (I wish I had a dollar for every Sharpie I've taken from a user[1].)

    Actually, HFS+ is good up to 85% (and yes, 5% of a terabyte is significant enough to mention.) Ext3 is good to 90%, UFS is also good to about 90%- but I'd caution anyone thinking of it to not use Apple's implementation, as it's not as robust as say the FreeBSD one, and a bad fsck can leave you having to reformat the partition to use it again.

    Easy means jut that, it's got no part of functionality or risk- only operational simplicity. But the term "need" is a poor choice, as backups and disaster recovery are really about risk avoidance, not necessity. You can run without backups just fine until you have a disaster- if you don't have an incident, then your "need" is zero unless you have a regulatory or contractual obligation for one (I spent a number of years doing actual risk assessment and have one patent in risk measurement-) until the point of loss. At that point, you have a need for the data, but having a backup may not even satisfy that need.

    Also, what starts out as an "easy" solution may not end up being one as the amount of data increases. For instance, pulling one drive of a mirror set and taking off-site is "easy," where pulling 20 becomes more difficult and as we move to solid state devices, the point at which recovery is "easy" may depend a lot on what you've done in the interim to "update" your backups- for instance, if you're an old "sell 'em prints" style wedding photographer, a 20th anniversary may find you unable to mate an old SATA drive with Internet3 available remote storage.

    It's ultimately all about risk- and I've seen enough RAID failures to consider it an unacceptable risk in terms of redundancy for my own data. Lots of people play the odds with security and redundancy- just because some folks win doesn't mean everyone will.

    [1] Sharpie ink is acidic, those CDs you wrote on with one are likely to be unreadable inside four-five years (two's the minimum I've seen degradation enough to be unreadable,) and the *top* of the CD/DVD is the fragile lacquer part, the bottom is nice hard plastic that can take a lot more abuse.
    I've seen enough "archive to CD/DVD" stuff in design/graphics/publishing houses to know that they never revisit their archival media until it's too late to recover from bad media.
     
  14. Digital Skunk macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #14
    Personally, everyone here is very correct.

    RAID is not a backup solution since it can't restore files that may be lost or corrupted. It's only part of the a backup solution.

    Get a RAIDed drive to do the mirroring, but if the files are important, take that backup solution off site like Compuwar has mentioned.
     
  15. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #15
    I'm trying to find an easy solution to backups for a photography studio.

    I don't know much about Raid.

    But I'm looking at a LaCie 2TB (2 swappable drives)
    so I assume that is 2x 1TB >>

    That was the line that I responded to in the original post.

    As far as what raid stands for - back when disks were expensive and just not as expensive as the alternatives. It was for businesses which had budgets to acquire those drives. A small business never considered this option. They can now.

    I'll stick by what I said. I think you must have had so many set ups that have gone awry and in turn, you are wise to share your history and cautions. I guess everywhere I worked, we didn't have these issues. Drives did go bad, Raid systems as well but nothing like you claim.

    As far as risk management goes - if you are going to present this as such then we can go back to the original comment I made about optimizing vs maximizing. Risk management is about not only minimizing risk but calculating which risks one can live with.

    This is about a Photo Studio. A simple proposition that doesn't require a maximized solution. It requires an optimized one. Something that the owner can manage and with acceptable risks.

    If I went with your views - I would opt for two local backups, one hard drive based the other perhaps tape based. I would get a fast internet connection and pay for offsite storage by a company that specializes in it (and in a state that is known for minimal natural disasters) and so forth. I find nothing wrong with this. Naturally, one needs the $$$ for it.

    I guess we will have to agree to move along different philosophies and approaches.

    Without being rude, I think some of your examples are well...nothing to do with the needs in a studio. You present cases that offsite back up companies have for years used. No one argues about off site back ups. Bad data writes can happen on tape, drives and other media also used by off site back up systems.

    This is all getting rather elliptical.

    I hope the original poster gets some food for thought and puts in a system.

    PS
    I have dealt with law offices that have ALL the issues of data retention and document management. Handled data under HIPAA, SOX and other legislation in the financial space as well as early on handling of blob files in databases and all the issues of backing up data and safe storage and so on ad nauseam. This doesn't make me an expert. Nor does your offerings. It merely means we have experience and awareness. What we will agree on is that all of the "back up" options have potential failure points.
     
  16. joaoferro37 macrumors 6502

    joaoferro37

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Vogon Planet Destructor
    #16
    I use this mainly for my HDV and DVCPro HD editing as a scratch disk and archiving

    http://www.amazon.com/RAIDSTREAM-TW...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1225850065&sr=8-1

    It has nice front RAID setting and RAID level LED.
    Besides, it is trayless and not a fixed drive, so I can always swap out the drive for archiving or upgrading the capacity as needed.

    I also used caldigit vr but found out this is more flexiable.
     

Share This Page