On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 03:15:37 +0500 "Alexander V. Makartsev" <avbe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 26.01.2019 2:28, Celejar wrote: > > On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 01:09:59 +0500 > > "Alexander V. Makartsev" <avbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > ... > > > >> If you value your data, my recommendation is to get inexpensive NAS with > >> iSCSI, like Synology DS218j and run two disks in RAID1 for redundancy. > >> This decision has many advantages, like: > >> 1. You still will have your data even in case one drive fails or gets > >> multiple bad blocks, so that 60Gb Virtual HD image will not turn out to > >> be a punch card when you will try to use it as a backup. > > RAID is for uptime, availability, performance - not ensuring the safety > > of valuable data. > > > > https://www.raidisnotabackup.com/ > > > > Backing up properly is the only way to safeguard valuable data. With > > proper backups, your data will be safe with or without RAID. Without > > proper backups, your data will not be safe with or without RAID. > > > > Celejar > > > > > Well, James asked for advice on USB disk drive that will be used as > storage for backups. Ah, I think I misunderstood somewhat. I interpreted your recommendation to mean a single copy of the data on the NAS, not that the NAS was a backup target for data stored primarily somewhere else. > It may seem like overkill, but I would prefer to be sure that my backups > are safe and consistent, because there are many ways things could go wrong. > > Speaking of RAID in general, I can see usefulness of URL you provided, > but only as a guide to fight with "I have RAID, it works, so I can > forget about it" kind of mentality of inexperienced people. > Yes, backup is important, but it is also important to be sure that your > backup will not fail you when you will need it the most, so using RAID > with proper monitoring and servicing procedures is always better than > just one drive. Fair enough. Celejar
