Re: Tape vs HDD vs NAS (speed considerations and size etc)..
- From: "Anna Clark" <anna.clark(remove this)@verizon.net>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:52:11 -0500
Hi markm75:
With this much data a tape solution will be fairly pricey... you are looking
at a tape library or autoloader, and significant time to get it done. Most
of these units come from Quantum, so you might want to research there. They
also have disk based solutions.
http://www.quantum.com/
Or, two or more NAS devices that you can carry in, carry out as needed to
rotate them?
Also, with this much data, is it reasonable to suggest that not all of it
gets changed every day? I am wondering if a remote backup might work for
you if the base backup was done to media, then incremental or differential
backups were done over the internet.
There are services that claim to "trickle" your local .bkf file to remote
servers over the internet in a small stream that you really don't
notice...(so they say, not tested be me), so if not every night has to be a
full backup, perhaps a full could be done over the weekend and smaller ones
daily.?
--
Regards:
Anna Clark
-----
Please do post the conclusion or solution
to your issue so that others may benefit.
"markm75" <markm75c@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1167949955.822316.230870@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I know this has been discussed before.. but I'm trying to make a
decision for our company on what to do in this regards..
We have close to 0.8 TB of data over 4 servers (each server has its own
external esata backup drive.. ranging from 250gb to 500gb per server)..
or main server's 400gb data drive is running out of space fast.. hence
the backup of 400gb on that one will soon too..
rather than just jumping to a 750gb drive.. we want to essentially
double our backup capacity and data capacity..
So I'm shooting for a single point data backup device that can be as
fast as eSata (at least), if not faster... ie: currently to backup
350gb of data using the windows backup method.. it can take between 10
and 15 hours! (I've benchmarked the drives.. they come in around 42
MB/s I believe)...
So the backup solution would ideally be at least this fast if not much
faster.
Originally we swap external drives every week, (2 sets) so one is
offsite.. prior to the HD idea.. they were doing tapes...
If we abandon the idea of tapes.. and dont worry about offsite backups
(what are most companies with this amount of data doing to get the data
backed up to an offsite location?)...
***What would be the next best solution.. a NAS device via Fiber (disk
array)? Or stick with the tape idea and get 400gb tapes in a Library
type setup? I'm not sure on speed, but I'm sure a NAS/HD array would
be lightning fast compared to any Tape system...
Thanks for any advice.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Tape vs HDD vs NAS (speed considerations and size etc)..
- From: markm75
- Tape vs HDD vs NAS (speed considerations and size etc)..
- Prev by Date: Re: RPC Service Missing on an SBS Server & some PCs slow to log in
- Next by Date: Re: SBS 2003 Backup repeatedly failing
- Previous by thread: Re: Tape vs HDD vs NAS (speed considerations and size etc)..
- Next by thread: Re: Tape vs HDD vs NAS (speed considerations and size etc)..
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading