Yep. rsync or any other delta capable backup method would probably do. (In
terms of backing up only changed bits)
I use unison to backup my docs and such....
P
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote:
> IISO? Google's not that helpful.
>
> Anyway, I have a large tower case with lots of drives that are grouped into
> a single lvm2 LV (logical volume). To back it up (since it's not yet full)
> I also have an external USB enclosure with two 1TB drives that are grouped
> into an LV. Every so often, I mount it, execute the appropriate magic to
> make the PV (physical volumes) visible and then mount it and do a backup.
>
> In your case, since MPEG2 files (i.e., DVDs) aren't compressible, I'd
> mirror the "active" movie folder to the external device with "cp -avu" or
> rsync. It'll take a while the first time, but afterwards it'll only move
> new/modified files.
>
> "tar cvfj" for your compressible files. Script out something that will
> copy (cp or tar, depending on the data) over the files. If you'd like, I'll
> send you my script.
>
> This (http://www.directron.com/etcsdu2jbk.html) is the same (or *very*
> similar) to what I have.
>
> Once that becomes too much for you, or if you want to Start Big, go with a
> 4- or 5-bay eSATA enclosure.
>
>
> On 2010-04-10 23:05, Shane Russo wrote:
>
>> I think my needs will be more reading. I plan on storing IISO of software
>> and pictures and some word docs and such. This is for in home use for
>> backups and organization. I have 2 1 TB drives that are quickly filling up
>> with DVD backups and home movies. Eventually I would like to build a
>> second
>> box and have it replicated offsite somewhere. The problem comes in how do
>> you backuo 3-8 TB of data?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Shane Russo
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2010-04-10 22:32, John Souvestre wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Shane.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It depends on what you do most – read or write. It also depends on the
>>>> size of the data blocks you are reading. For small blocks the disk
>>>> access
>>>> time is important and being able to get all of the data from just one
>>>> drive
>>>> access (Raid 1) is a big advantage. Indeed, with Raid 1 you can get
>>>> all of
>>>> the data from either drive, thus allowing you to overlap reads.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note also that there are two kinds of orthogonal reads and writes:
>>> length
>>> (short, long) and "direction" (sequential and random).
>>>
>>> BITD (back in the day) RAID5 was faster than RAID1 in long sequential
>>> reads
>>> because of parallelism (lots of disks and lots of controllers) but RAID1
>>> was
>>> faster at short reads and random short. (Random long doesn't really make
>>> sense.)
>>>
>>> Nowadays with capacities so enormous, it's hard to say what the
>>> performance
>>> of SATA drives would be.
>>>
>>>
> --
> Dissent is patriotic, remember?
> ___________________
> Nolug mailing list
> nolug@nolug.org
>
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org
Received on 04/11/10
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 04/11/10 EDT