Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/08/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]To me, at this moment, no, because it is very new and unproven. Is the technology reasonably sound? Probably since tape is well-established technology. Is their disaster recovery plans adequate? Unknown since Amazon hasn't said what it is other than some vague handwaving about multi-site replication. That magic 99.99999999% I would classify as purely marketing material until Amazon discloses how it is calculated. Can they guarantee data recovery for at least 20-50 years? No idea. If you have no other location where you can store data (office, home, friend's place), it might be worth a try. Uploading lots of photos (say RAW files @ 20MB each) will take quite a while with residential broadband connections is also a consideration. Regards, Spencer On Aug 22, 2012, at 23:06, Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at gmail.com> wrote: > I do not understand all this nit picking - my only question is: "is it > technologically good enough for an offsite backup - an additional safeguard > to normal backups?" If it is, it is worth it. It is not as if our work is > indispensable as of now to the world at large. If our data is good enough > to preserve, someone will find a way to do it. > Cheers > Jayanand > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Spencer Cheng <spencer at aotera.org> > wrote: > >> Hi Adam, >> >> According to the National Archive in Canada, the only archival medium >> suitable for 100 years is acid-free paper or microfiche. Our national >> census data which has to be stored for 75 years by law is delivered to the >> Archive on paper as far as I know. >> >> My preference is for laser-etched granite tablets. ;-) >> >> Modern tape drives have their own ECC scheme when they write data. Amazon >> would have to constantly copy the data in order to ensure that any of the >> tapes hasn't gone bad. Modern tapes are much improved over the DAT drives >> I >> used 15 years ago but they certainly are not archival quality. >> >> Keeping any system up for 99.999% time is a major struggle requiring very >> complex engineering. My imagination is significantly stretched by >> 99.99999999%. It definitely sounds like marketing speak. :) >> >> Regards, >> Spencer >> >> On Aug 22, 2012, at 15:16, Adam Bridge <abridge at mac.com> wrote: >> >>> You shouldn't really be surprised, Spencer. If data redundancy is built >> into the storage - lots of extra bits to allow for recoverable data - then >> you'd get the durability that Amazon quotes. >>> >>> You're guessing that they store on tape. That might be true but for >> long-term storage tape isn't an ideal candidate. However it's stored, >> Amazon says they have a technology, or a growth path for technology, that >> will keep your data alive and available for the indefinite future. >>> >>> Looks pretty attractive to me. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Spencer Cheng <spencer at aotera.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Sounds nice. Sounds a bit too good to be true. I would guess Amazon >> stores the data on tape on multiple sites. >>>> >>>> "Amazon Glacier is designed to provide average annual durability of >> 99.999999999% for an archive" >>>> >>>> I am surprised that that level of durability is possible on perishable >> media (and I don't really believe it :). >>>> >>>> One aspect of archival storage of digital data which is often >> overlooked is that digital data has to be regularly transcribed/converted >> to a current format for the archive to be useful. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Spencer >>>> >>>> On Aug 21, 2012, at 18:28, Adam Bridge <abridge at mac.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Amazon has announced "Glacier" as a long-term storage / infrequent >> retrieval service. It would seem perfect for those who wish to have a >> completely separate backup for their important image libraries. >>>>> >>>>> You can read about it here: >>>>> >>>>> <http://aws.amazon.com/glacier/> >>>>> >>>>> This is NOT for ready on-line storage. You might have to wait 5 hours >> to get your data. But it looks reasonably affordable. >>>>> >>>>> Adam Bridge >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >