#Tape or harddrive backup
19-Apr-94 14:22:19
Sb: #139766-#Tape or harddrive backup
Fm: Dale Larson 76702,654
To: Richard Graff 72711,1045
In a frictionless world where hardware is free, both is better. You
mirror HDs in real-time with dual controllers and cut over to the "backup"
if the primary drive fails. At the same time, you maintain tape archives
in case of catastrophic failure (such as a lightning strike), and for
off-site disaster recovery (fire, flood, etc.).
If you can only buy one or the other, tape is probably better. It makes
it possible to move huge amounts of data cheaply, doesn't wear out as fast
as HDs, allows multiple backups (i.e., you find you got a virus last week
and want the previous week's backup), etc., etc.
I recently went DAT. Well under $1k (about $500 refurb) will get you a
drive that will store 2gig on tiny tapes that cost $10-20. QIC drives are
just about obsolete, they go slower, store a lot less data, and the tapes
cost a lot more. The money you save on the drive doesn't fly vs. the cost
of the media over the years. For an effective backup system, you should
be using at least a half-dozen tapes, and you'll want to replace all of
those tapes every N full backups.
— Dale L. Larson, Intangible Assets Manufacturing
— INTERNET:dale@iam.com