Backup to USB3

[Rhialto]

When we will finally get a NAS, I was planning to have 2 disks in RAID1 and an external disk on USB3. Sometimes I wonder if RAID1 will still be needed but I will think about that later I guess...

I wanted to know what is commonly used to replicate on the USB3 disk? Currently I run an old version of Commodo Backup on my PC which will copy to an external disk all modified files after 2 minutes so this way I don't have to run a backup. Yeah I know, if I get infected this could be problematic but nevermind for now.

I was thinking to do the same on the NAS so I believe that would be an app running on the NAS that I will setup to copy any new file coming to it to the USB3 disk also after a delay?

 

[stevech]

I recommend not using RAID1 (mirroring). Better to have two volumes 1, 2. Then have automated backup for 1 to 2, run for selected folders/shares. Several backup tasks, with some copying more frequently, active folders that I designate. In mine, I have the time backup with file versioning (run once a day) so I have the last n versions on volume 2.
I do drive imaging of PCs to the NAS but I don't backup these backups.

Then once a day automation backs up most folders on volume 1 to a USB3 drive. And VIP files are auto-backed to big SD card in the NAS.

The issue with any RAID is that if the file system becomes corrupt, or you mistakenly delete or mangle a file, it is done on both drives.
I've been running the scheme described here for years and the ability to go back to an older file version has saved my touche many times. As have disciplined drive imaging and cloning on PCs, and getting in the habit of storing most files on the NAS, not on the PC.

Check in QNAP has the time backup with versioning before buying. Synology does so likely QNAP does too.

 

[Rhialto]

The issue with any RAID is that if the file system becomes corrupt, or you mistakenly delete or mangle a file, it is done on both drives.

So even RAID1 is not recommended? Then I guess no reason to buy a 4 disks NAS for my use. I mean for a long time I only considered 2 disaks because I thought RAID1 was ok for me and today I saw the cute TS-453mini with plenty of power for many years and I know I probably don't need a 4 disks system but they seem to always have the best NAS come out with 4 disks.

Now I wish there was a TS-253mini

 

[stevech]

Yes, my opinion is that very few consumer or SOHO users need 4 bays. The so-called benefits of RAID5 are misunderstood.

 

[coxhaus]

RAID1 will give you faster reads as it has more drives. Of course the writes are slower because you write to more drives. If you do more reads than writes which is usually the case then it will be faster. This is true with PC servers. A NAS I would think would be the same since they are small PCs. RAID 5 in my opinion does not get good until you hit 5 or 6 drives. RAID 5 also needs a good processor. But the same rules above hold for RAID5.

The benefit of RAID1 is if you lose a drive in a RAID1 configuration you just swap the bad drive out and the system rebuilds while you are still online and working. The rebuild happens in the background as you are still operating. Without RAID1 you have to stop and spend hours restoring all files. Restoring files usually turns out to be a waiting game as all the files copy over from your backups. Sometimes backups don’t restore for one reason are another so you are just left dead in the water. The problem at home with backups is there is no structure and routine like being at a job with a boss. It is so easy to let the backups slip.

 

[stevech]

Drive failure, IMO, is well down the list of data loss risks.
Below theft, human error (oops deleted/mangled files), and file system corruption - which on a RAIDn will propagate to all drives.

 

[Trexx]

RAID 1 is not designed to solve for human/sw error, that is what periodic drive health checks, network recycle bins, etc. are for. It's sole mission in life to to prevent having to setup all your filesystem, and restoring all your data in case of a failed HDD.

In a non-raid 1 configuration, if you have a drive crash, you are restoring all the data from backup. But you don't have any drive at that point, until you get it replaced, so you are also without access to the data on the NAS.

I have had 2 different qnaps, and have always used RAID in conjunction with backups. The nice benefit of going RAID-1 to start with is that if you upgrade fro 2 to 4 drives (assuming your qnap supports it), you can do a RAID-1 to RAID-5 migration and not have to wipe/reload your drives. It will just expand/restripe the data to use all 4 drives at that point.

 

[sfx2000]

If one has 4 drives, and running RAID1, well, that's pretty insane, and you're asking for trouble - and wasting disk space - 4 drives is good for a RAID5 config.

FWIW - RAID is not a substitute for backups - case in point - IBM BladeCenter, local blade is running RAID1, one of the pair died, which is ok, as the survivor kept the blade up - until the FE replaced the drive, and mirrored the New Drive over to the Running Master - boom, lost blade and rebuild of the OS/Apps across the RAID set...