on Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 03:38:26PM +1030, David Purton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 04:40:55AM +0000, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > on Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 02:37:26PM +1030, David Purton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 02:57:04AM +0000, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > > > > > If you need to recover a snapshot (or file) from 12 months ago, a > > > > three-disk rotation isn't going to do much for you. > > > > > > We backup offsite on CD, so restoring files 12 months old can be > > > covered that way. > > > > Did you back up to floppies in 1995? > > > > 1995 shipping hard disk size: 512 MiB > > 1995 shipping floppy size: 1.4 MiB > > Floppies required for a full system backup: 366 > > > > Current shipping hard disk size: 200 GiB > > Current shipping CDROM capacity: 700 MiB > > CDROMs required for a full system backup: 293 > > > > You could cover your needs with 1-2 large capacity tapes. > > > > Incremental backups would be even smaller. > > > > Note that CDR as arechival media for old projects is reasonably sane. > > For system backups, it's idiotic. > > > > This is what I mean - we do not need to be able to do a full system > restore for files in the distant past. > > We publish maths textbooks and each book fits on one or two CDs, so > once we have a book printed, we dump it onto CD and store copies in a > couple of locations. > > So backups from our point of view only need to cover for what's > currently being worked on.
Note that your risk model doesn't address system recovery should you need to rebuild servers. Just be aware that you've addressed only a small subset of the typical issues answered by a good backup scheme. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Linux Gazette: Making Linux just a little more fun. http://www.linuxgazette.net/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
