HP MediaSmart server question & RAID question

[netusinfoo]

Two questions:

1. Can you setup 3 or more drives in a Raid 1 config?
Duplicate copys trumps avaiable memory size for me.

2. I know HP MediaSmart Server does not use raid but can you set up 3 or 4 drives all as mirrors of each other easily?

 

[thiggins]

1. Can you setup 3 or more drives in a Raid 1 config?
Duplicate copys trumps avaiable memory size for me.

Conceptually, you can have more than two drives in RAID 1. But none of the NASes that I have tested work that way.

2. I know HP MediaSmart Server does not use raid but can you set up 3 or 4 drives all as mirrors of each other easily?

As far as I know, you can't control how WHS does its duplication.

If you want more safety, I would duplicate to another NAS to eliminate the single points of failure (power supply, controller board).

 

[netusinfoo]

Can the HP MediaSmart Server do the backup to external usb drive to store off site in fat32 format?

Also If duplicating to another NAS would I connect that NAS to the mediasmart?

Lastly I have heard of problems with backing up a backup in when the first fails, and the backup of the backup duplicates the corrupted drive leaving you with no backup, how is this avoided?

 

[vnangia]

Can the HP MediaSmart Server do the backup to external usb drive to store off site in fat32 format?

The new WHS Power Pack 1 contains a server backup feature, according to this. I think there's a review of it here. Of course, beware the HP plugins when upgrading to WHSPP1.

Lastly I have heard of problems with backing up a backup in when the first fails, and the backup of the backup duplicates the corrupted drive leaving you with no backup, how is this avoided?

Well, on the flip side, if your original copy is corrupted, then the backup is corrupted. But I would say this is very unlikely, since if you get that far down the tree, it means that BOTH your original copy and the backup is corrupted. I think the bottom line really is there is no 100% way to ensure you will not lose data. Backups (and backups of backups) are a way of reducing the likelihood and the extent of a loss of data, but they cannot guarantee it. (Required /. car analogy: It's like buying car insurance - you're protecting against a possible loss, but even if you have car insurance and drive incredibly well, you can still get into an accident and find your insurance doesn't cover it.)

Backup is insurance, and the more of it you have, the less likely you're going to be SOL if something does happen. And even though it's not catch-all, sure beats trying to remember it all.

 

[netusinfoo]

The new WHS Power Pack 1 contains a server backup feature, according to this. I think there's a review of it here. Of course, beware the HP plugins when upgrading to WHSPP1.



Well, on the flip side, if your original copy is corrupted, then the backup is corrupted. But I would say this is very unlikely, since if you get that far down the tree, it means that BOTH your original copy and the backup is corrupted. I think the bottom line really is there is no 100% way to ensure you will not lose data. Backups (and backups of backups) are a way of reducing the likelihood and the extent of a loss of data, but they cannot guarantee it. (Required /. car analogy: It's like buying car insurance - you're protecting against a possible loss, but even if you have car insurance and drive incredibly well, you can still get into an accident and find your insurance doesn't cover it.)

Backup is insurance, and the more of it you have, the less likely you're going to be SOL if something does happen. And even though it's not catch-all, sure beats trying to remember it all.

What do people do to avoid this? It seems that as soon as an original corrupts, your backup will see a change and copy the corrupt immediatly, and so on down the chain. The only way I can see to avoid this is to remove the backup of backup from any type of auto backup system and do manual backup of backups.
And only after you have seen that the original is still valid?

 

[vnangia]

What do people do to avoid this? It seems that as soon as an original corrupts, your backup will see a change and copy the corrupt immediatly, and so on down the chain. The only way I can see to avoid this is to remove the backup of backup from any type of auto backup system and do manual backup of backups.
And only after you have seen that the original is still valid?

The eternal question

I have three sets of backups. I have a nightly backup that runs at 3am except on Saturdays, and copies only files that have changed in the past 24 hours. I have a weekly copy that runs on Saturdays and copies a full set of my documents folder. I keep two of those - so only every fortnight does stuff get overwritten. Once a month, my computer makes a 1:1 bootable image copy of my hard disk. It keeps the most recent three monthly backups.

So, suppose something corrupts today. If I notice it today, then I can copy it before 3am the following day back from the nightly backup. If I don't notice it today, but find in two days time that something is borked, I go to the weekly copy. If I miss it for upto 12 weeks, I can get it from the monthly copy. If I've not noticed it's crapped out in 12-15 weeks - well... chances are good I'm not going to need it. I will most likely tweak this a little so I have three days of copies, and three weeks of copies at some point of time, but I've yet to lose any data using this.

I should add this is in addition to volume shadow copy on my Vista machine, and time machine on my Mac. So I also can restore copies from there in a pinch (and have, on occasion). As I tell anyone who asks: storage is cheap - backup everything first, ask questions later.