Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-security (145 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re[2]: [suse-security] data backup; my security risks.
  • From: Peter Romianowski <antarapero@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:49:39 +0100
  • Message-id: <14910401502.20041123124939@xxxxxxxxx>

just my 2 cents:

If money is an issue why not backup on a RAID system only? This can be a
quite cheap SATA-NAS (just bought one with 1.2 TB netto for about 5,000 euros).
With RAID-5 and a couple of spare-disks I guess you are save enough, especially
compared to single HDs. ;)

Of course it is best to do additional tape backups - but that is quite
expensive for these amounts of data and I doubt that you need this
extra savety.


> Philippe Vogel wrote:
>> piet schrieb:
>>> dear group,
>>> Can you give me some insight on how to store data (photos) savely and
>>> what kind of procedure I can follow best.
>>> We produce about 200Gig raw images a year.
>>> the workflow now is:
>>> work on a XP-box and copy the raw's and the jpeg's to a SuSE-box with
>>> winscp as a backup on removable harddisks. (I stopped making cd-s as
>>> we produce to much data, storing raw's and jpeg's)
>>> Will the removable disks last (ide western-digital)? now and again
>>> they're used on the system.
>>> We were used to shoot on slide film, now our entire workflow has
>>> changed and it troubles me to meet the time when images can't be
>>> retreived.
>>> regards,
>>> piet
>> Sounds like a photostudio or medical photo industry.
>> I would do so:
>> - main system raid 5, scsi
>> - temporary backup over nas (network attached storage) for latest data
>> - nas is synced with your data every day over night
>> - daily/weekly backups of all media (with tar) on (with gfs like the
>> solution in the other mail)
>> 200 GB or greater tapes (e.g.
>> or
>> DVD-RAM Jukebox
>> A DVD jukebox has the advantage that you can later access the data
>> within the dvd-tower, e.g. here:
>> 45 - 700 discs/max. 6 drives per jukebox
>> There are even solutions from kodak for medical imaging storage.
>> O.K. this may cost a hell, but lost data can cost more money depending
>> on the importance of that data.
>> Philippe
> thanks for replying.
> well your guess is close, we = two freelance photographers
> and in the old days storage wasn't so much a worry but finding images was,
> now shooting digital for almost 2 years, I begin to worry a bit about
> storage.

> The financial aspect might be a bottle neck.

> thanks again,
> piet

< Previous Next >