File Archiving

[pajdzn]

I am looking for the best method for archiving files. I have been using DVD's but have had a couple go bad, and added Hard drives as extra back-up but recently had 2 different drives go bad as well. Both were WD drives set up to mirror in order to ensure safety of data and one of them failed both drives, losing all data.
The other drive that failed still had the data on the mirrored drive so I was able to retrieve it. But now my files are getting much larger, too big for DVD without sectioning. I need something stable and safe. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you in advance.

[mattbeals]

I still say that tape is a great way of storing data long term. It's not the fastest, but it works great. If you can swing it you can build a storage server and keep it all online. I visited a customer and they keep their 32TB SAN online and available. You can build similar systems. If you need any help let me know.

[oxburger]

I agree with Matt. Tape. We have ours set to do an incremental backup daily on one tape and then when jobs get printed, we add the entire job to a separate backup tape.

[pajdzn]

Thank you for the replies, I was thinking tape myself but wasn't sure if anything new or better had been introduced.

[mazengh]

I have the same Issue at work, Tape is VERY slow for the data size... I currently store on a raid 5 server and I use vlauncher to compare my server data at night and make sure it's mirrored to another server that is just a cheap system with lots of space.

[Shawn]

In some places the disk vs tape argument is akin to the Mac vs PC or the Indesign vs Quark rathole. Whatever you use, just make sure to have multiple redundancy (as your example of the failed HD proves). A good rule of thumb is that a file isn't archived unless it's saved in 3 places.

We still have lots of data on tape from a legacy backup system that we'll continue to use but have moved more to rotating hard drives in a 'toaster' mechanism with one set of disks off-site. With the price of 2TB drives regularly approaching $60 it makes it easy to have multiple copies. Restoration is extremely fast compared to tape based systems.

Will the HDs or tapes last 30 years? Maybe not, but by then we'll have migrated to a newer system and recopied the old data. Looking back through the years I think we went from tape to CD to DVD to tape to HD.

Shawn

[mazengh]

i agree with shawn, multiple backups are the way to go. using share comparison software like vlauncher helped make the backups much faster cause it's doing a comparison and replacing what changed, deleting what's missing or adding what's new...

[otherthoughts]

Here's a link to a similar thread,
http://printplanet.com/forums/prepress-workflow-discussion/13086-back-up-archiving-ideas#post80663

Create multiple instances of your archive data, which are stored in separate geographical locations, upon fault-tolerant/reliable media types that you check the veracity of periodically.

Having all instances of your archives in the same room, does you no good if that room is destroyed in a fire.

Creating several instances of your archives upon media that is not fault-tolerant/reliable, does you no good should all instances of the media degrade/fail.

If you don't check/test the integrity/recoverability of your archives before they are needed, how can you feel comfortable in believing that your archives will perform when they really are needed?

Best Regards - OT

[mazengh]

i agree with otherthought

[Tech]

Sorry for reviving an old thread, but does anyone have a good recommendation [brand and model] for a NAS?