[nSLUG] Backups: dealing with large, growing photo collections (was: Selling Used Computers)
ak621 at chebucto.ns.ca
Tue Mar 30 13:37:44 ADT 2010
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On 03/30/2010 09:20 AM, Richard Bonner wrote:
>> *** I can't believe that so many don't seem to bother with backups.
>> With the low cost of floppies and flashdrives - even used zip drives,
>> there is no excuse except for laziness, as I see it.
> You've got to be kidding. OK, I won't disagree that backups are a good
> thing, but as my 1 terabyte drive fills up, you would counsel me to use
> such small media?
*** No, but we were talking about those with older, used computers
with considerably less storage areas. (-:
> Even the largest of these, flash drives, would be prohibitively
> expensive at that size.
*** Costs are dropping, but that aside, one only need back up data,
not programs. Even with movies, one could transfer them to DVD.
> My backups have been broken for some weeks, so I'm crossing my fingers
> that my relatively new drive will not kick it before I get it resolved.
> I have healthy supply of DVDs and have trimmed my backups down to just
> essentials: people's home dirs minus the easily identifiable
> large/transient stuff that could be re-downloaded should it ever be
*** Sounds good.
> The problem is, I still haven't dealt with the issue of regularly
> archiving off the large photo collections each user has from their
> digital cameras, while still making it possible for them to make edits
> as they see fit.
*** My guess is that many of those photos can be dumped. People
have a tendency to keep too many photos taken milliseconds apart,
plus all the duds, too. )-:.
> I'm pondering whether a unionfs would help here. I could build a
> unionfs on top of already-archived material (as the read-only layer)
> with a read-write layer on top. In my regular system-wide backups, I
> need only backup the read-write layer. At some point, I would want to
> re-archive, with the new archived disks containing any updated files,
> and then re-build the union with the newly archived material forming the
> new read-only layer. The trick would be to identify and throw out any
> disks in the archive that have directories that have changed ...
*** What about using a second TB drive?
> Hmm. Sounds like too much complexity to me. Would probably be easier
> just to tell users "I'm sorry, once your material is archived, you can
> no longer edit it. You can make copies of files and edit them, but you
> just can't edit the originals." That is a bit of a sacrifice in the
> users' freedom, though, for the sake of easing administration. I would
> like to avoid this if I can.
*** To how many users are you referring?
> Does anyone here successfully use a backup strategy that fits these needs?
*** I dump millisecond-duplicates and duds, and tend to keep the
rest on CD-ROMs.
More information about the nSLUG