Hard Drive Education

[magitek369]

However, the cost and the amount of space you get relative to a regular hard drive is the huge negative.

Agreed, absolutely. If I could get even a 160 GB solid state drive for a reasonable price then I'd already have one.

If you're really looking for a good backup drive, just buy a new regular hard drive that is known to be stable, even if it is a little older. You probably would need to get external casing and connections (eSATA or USB2/3), and that would probably suffice as cheap+OK backup, given modern tech.

I'll probably end up doing something along those lines; find a drive rated highly in reliability, put it in a good case, and use it strictly for backups. Seems to be the best bet.

There's no perfect solution... just good care and some luck is usually the best way to get the most at backing up data.

I know, I guess it's just the random factor that irks me is all. Oh well, not like anything else in life is perfect either.

[paulguy]

You know, an SSD as a main drive isn't as bad as you all make it out to be. The one thing you'd probably want to avoid is swapping to it, otherwise it'll probably last longer than most modern hard disk drives when you consider mechanical failure.

[kode54]

The funny thing is, Windows needs a minimal swap file on the primary OS partition, at least if you ever expect to bluescreen and have a minidump so you know exactly why you bluescreened. Since it writes the minidump to the page file and then copies it to the correct location after rebooting.

[Gil_Hamilton]

You assume people buy new media for every backup instead of recycling old media.

Surely you don't mean every "single" backup. I'd buy new media for the sole purpose of use as a backup, but of course I'm not going to buy a new drive, no matter how cheap, every single time I back up my data. That's just foolish.

It depends how rigorous your backups are.

Two backups is the traditional minimum standard. One on-site, one off-site. And you rotate the on-site to the off-site to the system.

Obviously, it can get FAR more complex than that.

Reason is it's cheap, you don't have to take the entire drive assembly out every time you do a backup, and it's got a regular failure pattern so you can easily identify worn tapes and replace them before they fail.

...And flash has a finite lifetime which can be taken into consideration as well. Hard disk crashes can be anticipated to an extent, but as mechanical devices they're still prone to random failure as well. More importantly though, even once you've reached the write limit on flash media, you can still read from it.

But it's ridiculously expensive next to hard drives and magnetic tape.

You seem to be confusing backup with reliable main drive. They are different things.

So it's wrong to want my backups to be reliable? I concede that solid state would make a primary drive given its limited write ability, but its reliability and durability, IMO, make it an excellent choice for my, "stuff I don't want to lose", folder.

A backup is NOT IN YOUR SYSTEM. It is a duplicate copy of data that exists OUTSIDE YOUR SYSTEM. Preferably in a different building from your system, or at least in a fire&crush-proof box.

Backups ARE reliable. But under different standards than main drives.
Backup media is not in constant use, for one. And magnetic tape handles starting and stopping better than hard drives.

[magitek369]

You know, an SSD as a main drive isn't as bad as you all make it out to be. The one thing you'd probably want to avoid is swapping to it, otherwise it'll probably last longer than most modern hard disk drives when you consider mechanical failure.

This was my original thought as well. I'm going to just agree with this guy and declare topic complete.

[Deathlike2]

You know, an SSD as a main drive isn't as bad as you all make it out to be. The one thing you'd probably want to avoid is swapping to it, otherwise it'll probably last longer than most modern hard disk drives when you consider mechanical failure.

This was my original thought as well. I'm going to just agree with this guy and declare topic complete.

SSDs are fine as long as you don't constantly write to it. It's meant for reading like booting the OS or loading apps... not content creation.

You will have to have a second drive available anyways, for everything else.

Ideally, you will have to run Windows 7, or an OS that issues TRIM commands to the SSDs.
Not having this ability will accelerate the deterioration of the drive in terms of performance.

[odditude]

lots o' stuff

most people don't mean "backup" in an enterprise sense, d00d - it's just "omg needz to save my pics and mp3s and wareZ and pr0n!"

although i think it'd be amusing trying to explain SCSI + LTO drive config, let alone the cost of controller, drive, media, and offsite vaulting.

then again, there are probably some people here insane enough to run TSM or somesuch on their desktop O_o

[Gil_Hamilton]

lots o' stuff

most people don't mean "backup" in an enterprise sense, d00d - it's just "omg needz to save my pics and mp3s and wareZ and pr0n!"

But that's not a backup, it's not even remotely related to a backup.
At least the PS/XBawkz kiddies ARE remotely on the right track when they call their pirated disks "backups." VERY remotely, but still...


I readily acknowledge that backing your shit up has become very difficult with the rapid expansion of hard drives, and the rise of the internet providing content to fill them.
But a porn stash is not a backup, no matter how reliable a drive it's on. It's just a really reliable porn stash.


I do admit I don't have any sort of backup plan.
I just pray my hard drive doesn't crash.
I've got shit from the 90s on here. Seriously.
Probably nothing I'd even notice was missing, but still!

although i think it'd be amusing trying to explain SCSI + LTO drive config, let alone the cost of controller, drive, media, and offsite vaulting.

then again, there are probably some people here insane enough to run TSM or somesuch on their desktop O_o

I want a tape drive...

I suppose a removable 2TB hard drive would be perfectly fine for my purposes, but...

[odditude]

]although i think it'd be amusing trying to explain SCSI + LTO drive config, let alone the cost of controller, drive, media, and offsite vaulting.

then again, there are probably some people here insane enough to run TSM or somesuch on their desktop O_o

I want a tape drive...

I suppose a removable 2TB hard drive would be perfectly fine for my purposes, but...

hm. apparently companies are making SATA (not just SAS, plain SATA) and USB tape drives nowadays. your dreams are within reach, for the low low price of $500+

[Clements]

I'm still not sure about jumping on the SSD bandwagon as yet. The real-world performance increases are indeed enormous, but the tech still doesn't seem that mature yet. It seems every month there's a better controller with even better performance and durability, but I guess that goes with everything in the computing world.

[Deathlike2]

Well, with any progressively better tech, it is definitely good to wait if you're not an early adopter. Perhaps something significant will come up.

I'd say when we reach 1TB with SSDs, the tech should be mature enough (not sure how long it will take, but maybe 2 years max?).... then you'll have to wait for the affordable 1TB SSDs (within a year after perhaps).

[Gil_Hamilton]

I'm still not sure about jumping on the SSD bandwagon as yet. The real-world performance increases are indeed enormous, but the tech still doesn't seem that mature yet. It seems every month there's a better controller with even better performance and durability, but I guess that goes with everything in the computing world.

Intel's is still the best, and they were first.

They just won't ofer the TRIM-enabled firmware to owners of the first-gen drives.

[Panzer88]

that doesn't run scandisk.

there is no scandisk anymore but virtually the same thing only the modern version is called Error-checking, in the tools tab when you select properties of a harddrive in windows explorer.

[odditude]

that doesn't run scandisk.

there is no scandisk anymore but virtually the same thing only the modern version is called Error-checking, in the tools tab when you select properties of a harddrive in windows explorer.

it's called CHKDSK.

[Rashidi]

that doesn't run scandisk.

there is no scandisk anymore but virtually the same thing only the modern version is called Error-checking, in the tools tab when you select properties of a harddrive in windows explorer.

it's called CHKDSK.

b-but, chkdsk already exist since dos age ...

[Gil_Hamilton]

that doesn't run scandisk.

there is no scandisk anymore but virtually the same thing only the modern version is called Error-checking, in the tools tab when you select properties of a harddrive in windows explorer.

it's called CHKDSK.

b-but, chkdsk already exist since dos age ...

Windows NT CHKDSK is a different tool than MS-DOS CHKDSK, and is more in line with CHKDSK + SCANDISK.

[odditude]

Code: Select all

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Windows\system32>chkdsk /?
Checks a disk and displays a status report.


CHKDSK [volume[[path]filename]]] [/F] [/V] [/R] [/X] [/I] [/C] [/L[:size]] [/B]


  volume          Specifies the drive letter (followed by a colon),
                  mount point, or volume name.
  filename        FAT/FAT32 only: Specifies the files to check for fragmentation
.
  /F              Fixes errors on the disk.
  /V              On FAT/FAT32: Displays the full path and name of every file
                  on the disk.
                  On NTFS: Displays cleanup messages if any.
  /R              Locates bad sectors and recovers readable information
                  (implies /F).
  /L:size         NTFS only:  Changes the log file size to the specified number
                  of kilobytes.  If size is not specified, displays current
                  size.
  /X              Forces the volume to dismount first if necessary.
                  All opened handles to the volume would then be invalid
                  (implies /F).
  /I              NTFS only: Performs a less vigorous check of index entries.
  /C              NTFS only: Skips checking of cycles within the folder
                  structure.
  /B              NTFS only: Re-evaluates bad clusters on the volume
                  (implies /R)

The /I or /C switch reduces the amount of time required to run Chkdsk by
skipping certain checks of the volume.

[/size]

[PHoNyMiKe]

I have two 500GB drives in RAID 1, formatted to NTFS, storing music, photos, stuff I don't want to lose, and another 500GB external formatted to FAT32 so mac osx can use it. I use synctoy in windows to sync the RAID and the external. the external was getting temps of 48c, so I cut a hole and put a 120mm fan on the side, now it runs 30c, and doesn't make the chirping noise anymore.

[odditude]

chirping noise

smart threshold reached alarm?

[grinvader]

[MajereDB8]

Simple backup solution.

Requirements:
One copy of Acronis TrueImage or Norton Ghost
One spindle of DVDs
One flash drive

Steps:
1. Install imaging software such as Ghost or TrueImage.
2. Make boot CD for use with imaging software.
3. Create full disk image using said imaging software.
4. Make additional back-up of important business or personal documents onto flash drive.
5. Repeat step 3 every 3-6 months, and repeat step 4 every 2-4 weeks.

Done. This isn't quite as seamless as using imaging software onto a backup hard drive or NAS, but it's much cheaper and reasonably reliable. For moderate users like myself with < 30GB of data on my system, a system back-up ony takes about half an hour and 4 single layer DVDs (using compression). This lacks the bells and whistles of a more modern backup system with incremental or differential backups, but it fits my needs quite well.