Re: [OT] Backups

["liakakos" <ukha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think you're going down the right route with the portable HD, but
you might be looking at the remote online backup the wrong way. As you
say, 1TB is a lot of data, and certainly something you're unlikely to
be able to backup over DSL or similar in a hurry, so I'd use it as an
incremental backup device instead, refreshing it every night - 1GB
will take about 5 hours over a 512kbit line (ADSL uplink). On UNIX, I
use a tool called rsync, which just copies the deltas. There are
equivalents for Windows, but I don't know which is best. This may
still be unviable depending on how much data you see changed daily. In
which case, I think you're doing about the best you can.


--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "Ho Yin Ng" <architect.hoyin@...>
wrote:
>
> >
> > But with the automatic incremental online backup together with an
offsite
> > weekly backup from the week before ensures that in the event of
total loss
> > we would be able to restore everything.
> >
>
>
>
>
> We were having problems with the tape system hence our change to the
auto
> online backup.
>
> I cannot see any other way of transfering data quickly without some
manual
> intervention.  Unless you to a complete online backup system where
at the
> end of the week your entire system was backed-up online?
>
> But at 1TB I just don't think with todays speeds and costs that this
is
> viable. So a portable HD is the only sensible way.
>
> I think we have the easiest solution that provides us with the
greatest
> flexibility and covers all eventualities.
>
> Happy to hear any suggestions to make it better though.
>
> Ho yin
>
>
>
> Tape backups, disk backups, and manual offsiting. That actually sounds
> > more complicated than most of the suggestions on here ;-)
> >
> > As you say, "you want the easiest method that requires the
least input
> > by the user". Unless you have a dedicated techie, having to
swap tapes
> > and plug external drives in weekly isn't ideal, and, trust me,
small
> > non-technical companies soon forget to regularly perform these
tasks,
> > which is why it's best to engineer around them.
> >
> > Your Windows 2003 solution is very sensible and something more
> > companies should implement, however by not offsiting daily, you
do
> > risk losing a week's worth of work, but depending on what you do,
this
> > may not be a problem.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>