Hard drive-based backup in lieu of tape backup

Hello,

We've just reached the point with our single-tape backup drive where
we have too much data to back up on a single-tape drive. Our backup
has now reached 4 tapes, so the backup procedure is simply taking too
long for our business to function at the level it needs to.

We're now faced with the decision of whether to go to a multi-tape
robotic library of some type, or move to an entirely disk-based backup
solution. I'd really like to move to disks, and still maybe run tape
backup every 1 or 2 weeks for a while until we get adjusted to the
disk-based method.

Has anyone else experimented with this yet? We currently use Symantec
Backup Exec 11d for tape, so we can continue to use that with the disk-
based or removable disk-based backup processes that are built into
BE11. I can't decide whether to use USB/FireWire external drives or
go ahead and buy a NAS device and run backups to the RAID, and just
remove the physical disks to take offsite. Any suggestions?

Thanks,
-Coleman

Coleman wrote:
>

>
We currently use Symantec Backup Exec 11d

That's the first thing to get rid of. In my experience, Symantec /
Norton products are simply disasters waiting to happen.

As for the rest - you're in the same quandary as plenty of others.

I'd suggest multiple, external RAID 1 or RAID 5 arrays - using full
backups (avoid incremental) each day to separate arrays.

I personally don't trust tape at all; head alignment always
questionable/ dubious and the cause of many problems, plus the cost per
GB, etc,

Critically important data can - in most cases - be backed up to DVD
which is more secure (in my opinion) than tape.

Bear in mind - when we were selling 40MB drives back in 1992, a tape
streamer cost 25% of the hard drive cost - and they tended to be
reliable. Now? Tape backup costs up to 2000% of the storage costs.

Trying to back up 6TB to tape nowadays? There's not a single tape
solution I'd trust.


Duncan
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts

Previously Odie Ferrous <odie_ferrous@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Coleman wrote:
>>

>>
> We currently use Symantec Backup Exec 11d

> That's the first thing to get rid of. In my experience, Symantec /
> Norton products are simply disasters waiting to happen.

> As for the rest - you're in the same quandary as plenty of others.

> I'd suggest multiple, external RAID 1 or RAID 5 arrays - using full
> backups (avoid incremental) each day to separate arrays.

Independent arrays is the key. Otherwise you can loose all
on a single mistake.

> I personally don't trust tape at all; head alignment always
> questionable/ dubious and the cause of many problems, plus the cost per
> GB, etc,

> Critically important data can - in most cases - be backed up to DVD
> which is more secure (in my opinion) than tape.

DVD is very problematic. If you have the right combination
of medium und drive, it may work very well. But it may also
be anu degree of a desaster. DVD-RAM is a bit better.

> Bear in mind - when we were selling 40MB drives back in 1992, a tape
> streamer cost 25% of the hard drive cost - and they tended to be
> reliable. Now? Tape backup costs up to 2000% of the storage costs.

> Trying to back up 6TB to tape nowadays? There's not a single tape
> solution I'd trust.

It depends a bit on the price and size range. I have used an
IBM tape library for some years, that is pretty reliable and
tolerably fast. Holds about 500 cartridges with 200GB each and
has 4 * tape drives. This is a bit of a higher price class
though and used by > 100 people for backup and data archiving.

Arno

On Feb 15, 5:06*pm, Odie Ferrous <odie_ferr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Coleman wrote:
>
> We currently use Symantec *Backup Exec 11d
>
> That's the first thing to get rid of. *In my experience, Symantec /
> Norton products are simply disasters waiting to happen.
>
> As for the rest - you're in the same quandary as plenty of others.
>
> I'd suggest multiple, external RAID 1 or RAID 5 arrays - using full
> backups (avoid incremental) each day to separate arrays.
>
> I personally don't trust tape at all; head alignment always
> questionable/ dubious and the cause of many problems, plus the cost per
> GB, etc,
>
> Critically important data can - in most cases - be backed up to DVD
> which is more secure (in my opinion) than tape.
>
> Bear in mind - when we were selling 40MB drives back in 1992, a tape
> streamer cost 25% of the hard drive cost - and they tended to be
> reliable. *Now? *Tape backup costs up to 2000% of the storage costs.
>
> Trying to back up 6TB to tape nowadays? *There's not a single tape
> solution I'd trust.
>
> Duncan
> --
> Retrodatawww.retrodata.co.uk
> Globally Local Data Recovery Experts

So if I eliminate a tool like Backup Exec, what method should I use to
backup everything? Keep in mind, I've got things like Exchange and SQL
Server that need to be backed up, preferably all with a single tool.
Is there an alternative to BE?

Coleman wrote:
>
> On Feb 15, 5:06 pm, Odie Ferrous <odie_ferr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Coleman wrote:
> >
> > We currently use Symantec Backup Exec 11d
> >
> > That's the first thing to get rid of. In my experience, Symantec /
> > Norton products are simply disasters waiting to happen.
> >
> > As for the rest - you're in the same quandary as plenty of others.
> >
> > I'd suggest multiple, external RAID 1 or RAID 5 arrays - using full
> > backups (avoid incremental) each day to separate arrays.
> >
> > I personally don't trust tape at all; head alignment always
> > questionable/ dubious and the cause of many problems, plus the cost per
> > GB, etc,
> >
> > Critically important data can - in most cases - be backed up to DVD
> > which is more secure (in my opinion) than tape.
> >
> > Bear in mind - when we were selling 40MB drives back in 1992, a tape
> > streamer cost 25% of the hard drive cost - and they tended to be
> > reliable. Now? Tape backup costs up to 2000% of the storage costs.
> >
> > Trying to back up 6TB to tape nowadays? There's not a single tape
> > solution I'd trust.
> >
> > Duncan
> > --
> > Retrodatawww.retrodata.co.uk
> > Globally Local Data Recovery Experts
>
> So if I eliminate a tool like Backup Exec, what method should I use to
> backup everything? Keep in mind, I've got things like Exchange and SQL
> Server that need to be backed up, preferably all with a single tool.
> Is there an alternative to BE?

I'm afraid I wouldn't have the foggiest about the best backup software.

I personally don't trust any automated software - fortunately my
critical data amounts to well under 1GB, so I manually copy my this data
to alternate USB sticks a few times a day, with weekly backups (of each
last daily backup) to DVD.

I sincerely feel for companies who have terabytes of data to backup -
there really is nothing out there that is bullet-proof.



Duncan
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts