-=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: "GMan" <gman.pctt@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:50:15 -0400
Rose,
For all of the reasons you mentioned (and for several more that you
didn't), I am happily dropping the idea of backing up anything from your
system to optical disks.
In its place, I'm thinking that you might just be leading yourself to a
possible RAID setup afterall. The two major functions of RAID is
performance (RAID 0 - Striping - where the 1s and 0s that make up your data
are broken up across two or more drives to speed up reads & writes) &/or
redundancy (RAID 1 - Mirroring - where every bit of your data is written to
two or more drives at the same time). Every other flavor is a variation on
a combination of these two themes. Since your backup would exist on an hard
drive, it could make perfect sense for you to have the backup go to 2 drives
set up in a RAID 1 configuration. Your backup software would be making one
backup, but your system would take the files and place them on two hard
drives instead of one.
The benefits:
1. If your backup drive goes down, your backups are still safe on the
other drive.
2. Replace the failed drive, instruct the BIOS to rebuild the RAID array
and you're right back to having two copies of your safety net.
3. With all you stand to lose from a backup hard drive failure, you'll
probably sleep much better at night.
The downside:
1. Two large drives are tied up holding the same backup files. As far as
the OS (and your everyday computing sessions) is concerned, a RAID 1 setup
looks like a single drive with the capacity of just one of the drives. (so
500GB X 2 =500GB)
2. Chances are excellent that your combined mainboard and Firewire switch
setup will not be able to be used for a RAID config. The hard drives would
need to be of the SATA variety, have the same capacity, and, depending on
your mainboard's chipset and the features integrated by the board's maker,
at least one of them will need to be mounted as an internal drive. In most
cases, both will need to be internal.
As you've already insisted, hard drives are relatively cheap compared to
most other storage mediums. More importantly, your data is priceless and I
already know how badly you want to ensure that it is available to your
kids/grandkids/great grandkids/etc.. With all I know about your system and
the types of data you're collecting, I do believe that this is the right
approach for you to take, at least until technological advances come up with
something even better.
However, I will still suggest that once or twice a year you burn
anything that's irreplaceable so you can store it somewhere other than your
home (a fire could wipe out all of the hard drives). This would not be
considered a backup. It's more like a term insurance policy for your data.
I'll further suggest that you don't toss out the older sets as new ones are
added. If/when the time comes to create these disks, I'll show you how to
get around the long file names problem. This paragraph is the most
important part of what I was going to say in that 'future' post on the
subject.
I will now try to properly explain multi-booting in a separate post.
I'm thinking it's probably best to keep different topics separated for the
sake of both clarity and your sanity. If we can keep the flow as simple and
uncluttered as possible, I'm hoping that you won't experience any undue
anxiety over the choices in front of you. If we take things one simple step
at a time without jumping around too much, you'll see the absolute best
system of data organization quickly come together for you.
You're welcome, Jerry. ;O}
Peace,
GMan
"The only dumb questions are the ones that are never asked!"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tech Rose - LoveBytes" <TechRose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 4:49 AM
Subject: -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational
Method
> GMan,
> I have used at least a yardstick between myself and multiple OS' and/or a
> Dual Boot System.
>
> Fear of the unknown is probably why. I have some thoughts based on
> 'nothing' that this would be fairly complex and then require quite a bit
> of
> learning (can I ?) and babysitting.
>
> If I install a program in one system, do I have to install it again
> (possibly in the same folder) for everything to work in both systems?
>
> I an totally ignorant about this and have felt it would take quite a bit
> of
> reading and study to accomplish this and feel comfortable with it.
> (Like I had to SAY I was totally ignorant about it... I am sure my
> previous
> sentences proved that already..but..being redundant..is a habit of mine.
> I
> always want to be sure I get my message across and understood....LOL!)
>
> I will try to keep an open mind to this suggestion. I hear a lot of talk
> about it, but have not experienced it at all. I have read a bit about it
> being recommended in Vista talks.
>
> When you mentioned CD/DVD backups, I have to admit...I cringed. The
> thought
> of backing up to those small volume devices is a nightmare to me.
> Why would I want to backup to a CD/DVD when disks drives are dirt cheap
> and
> much less time consuming to make a backup and also much less time
> consuming
> to retrieve data from and restore it?
>
> When I can buy a 500 GB hard drive for $140 why would I want to use the
> other media? (Now I know I do not need to buy any drives...and I have
> more
> than I need.) For that $140 I could create a backup of most of my data.
> The cost of doing so on the 111 DVD's that would take @$0.19 ea would be
> $21.00 (111 x .19). The amount of time would be days. I could pretty
> much
> let the system back itself up over night (and maybe a bit longer) without
> any intervention on my part. If I had two such drives, I would spend
> $280.00 and I could make hundreds of backups on each one. I could also
> easily restore my data if need be much more easily that the 111 DVD's
> would
> allow me to do. I could restore a file a folder a directory or a whole
> partition in much less time than it would take to find the exact DVD's I
> need to restore the data. The labeling and storing of these many DVD's
> would be so cumbersome.
>
> My hard drives would be useable over and over and over. The DVD's, unless
> I
> am willing to spend about $0.50 each would be a one time burn. So I would
> continue to have to buy new DVD's. That $21.00 backup just jumped to
> $55.50. I would need at least 2 sets at a time, so now we are at $111.00
> and 222 DVD's. This is a large library to CREATE and MAINTAIN. And
> again,
> a daunting task (in my mind) to use to restore.
>
> I have a habit, and probably a bad habit too in that I give very long
> names
> to some of my files, especially graphics and scrapbooking file folders and
> files.
> In the Scrapbooking arena, everyone is worried about getting credit for
> you
> using products you purchased from them. You receive files with long names
> and weird characters !@# ~ etc. Sometimes the file names are too long
> when
> burned to a DVD. This can sometimes cause you to lose the DVD or the
> file..or both. But I have not had a big problem with ones that are backed
> up to a hard drive.
> In my Scrapbooking partition is one folder is 21.3GB and represents
> purchases I have made in the last 6 months. It has 16,000+ files in 2600+
> folders.(There is redundancy in these files, but I do not care. It is the
> ease of use, and finding what I want, when I want it that is most
> important
> to me. My time at age 62 is more important to me. This may or may not be
> the biggest single folder in that directory, but there are a number of
> large
> ones. Just the 163 GB of Scrapbooking files is enough to make me want to
> say no..I am not interested in sitting and burning DVD's.
>
> While my mind is not very open on this subject, it is not closed. Maybe
> you
> can convince me.If I did not have the hard drive space the money could
> well
> be an issue with me and things could be different.
>
> Re-reading your message, I realize I "MAY" have "SLIGHTLY" over-reacted to
> your CD/DVD backup suggestion you said you would mention in FUTURE
> email(s).
>
> I do not think I know everything...as evidenced by my fear of dual booting
> machines. I do admit..they sound sexy.. but I am concerned about learning
> about them and what it takes to maintain them. I am opened and
> interested.
> I do like the idea of being able to switch the master/slave cables (and
> drive settings) and then have a system up and ready to work to resolve
> issues.
>
> My use of a computer is for fun, family projects, making a family legacy
> for
> my children and grandchildren..(their pictures and the history of their
> ancestors.
> I also like to just goof off and have fun playing games and chatting and
> oh
> yes.. talking to tech folks....lol! (I do banking and taxes and the other
> ugly things in life I have to do too... ha ha!)
>
> So, anything I can do to allow me to do that..sounds like a plan.... My
> ears
> are open.....(and my eyes..although I have to admit..this SOUNDS like a
> conversation, rather than written correspondence...I love it!
>
> Thanks so much... You are AMAZING!
> Rose
--
Please remember to trim your replies (including this sentence and everything
below it) and adjust the subject line as necessary.
To unsubscribe or change your email settings:
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
http://www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
- References:
- -=PCTechTalk=- Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: GMan
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: Tech Rose - LoveBytes
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: GMan
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: Tech Rose - LoveBytes
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: GMan
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: Tech Rose - LoveBytes
Other related posts:
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- -=PCTechTalk=- Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: GMan
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: Tech Rose - LoveBytes
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: GMan
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: Tech Rose - LoveBytes
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: GMan
- -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Rose's Completely Simplified Organizational Method
- From: Tech Rose - LoveBytes