Forum Moderators: open
The latest suggestion is for us to get an LT03 or LT04 drive. I just did a search around and found that the LT03 goes for upwards of £1100 GBP (and the LT04 even more). This seems excessive for a single server that has (at the moment a maximum of) about 150gb of data needing backup.
The plan was to get two tapes:
- Do a full backup once a week and incrementals for each day after that.
- Then swap the tapes at the end of each week and keep one off site.
I would have thought there was a cheaper/easier way to do this but this is the nth version of this backup plan and at this stage I don't know what to think.
A hard disk will probably do the job faster, more reliably and cheaper.
Kaled.
I did mention this but there was a lot of talk about how it had to be ruggedized and the idea was passed over.
I think part of the reason being that the IT contractors have a penchant for expensive hardware.
Kaled.
The price definitely seems excessive. Is there a major problem with using smaller capacity and more tapes?
I found a 250GB solid-state sata drive for £700 on Amazon. Oddly that's more than twice the cost per GB that you should pay for a USB pen drive - I definitely don't understand that!
As for ruggedness/reliability, flash beats tape hands down - there just is no comparison. Try placing a tape in washing machine, exposing it to direct sunlight for a few hours, or exposing to strong magnetic fields or repeated vibration.
The issue of limited writes makes flash ideal for backup. Flash is are also far less limited than tape.
Kaled.
Then swap the tapes at the end of each week and keep one off site.
So if a couple weeks go by before you notice something is missing, you're screwed?
