Edward C. Zimmermann wrote: > Dana, > > It seems that you suggest you know something that the gang I know at > LOC and most of the National Libraries don't.. Are you using sarcasm? That'd be a first on the Internet :-) > Quoting "Dana H. Myers" <dana.myers@xxxxxxxxx>: > >>> The problem of the longivity of the image has not been solved in the >>> digital imaging realm. >> I completely disagree. You need to think like a data archivist and >> not a photographer to understand. > > RAID is NOT the answer.. A single RAID array _alone_ is not the anwer, sure. Replicating data across a diverse set of fault domains, however, *is* the answer. This is exactly what I mean by thinking like a data archivist - with data, you can make any number of replicas of the data without degrading it. You're interested in preserving the data, not the media on which the data is stored - in fact, you're preserving the data *despite* the media. So you get clever about replicating the data to improve the odds against loss. A single RAID array can give better reliability than a single disk, but it's still a single point of failure - as you've observed. Configuring multiple RAID boxes so you can tolerate the failure of an entire box is an improvement; interconnecting multiple geographically-diverse collections of RAID boxes is better still. Do you achieve perfection this way? Is the data totally safe? No, but the odds of losing data - digitally-stored images - quickly become far smaller than the odds of losing a single negative stored in a house. Sure, this means that no single one of us is in the position to create such sophisticated configurations. That's why I mention leaving it to the professionals, like Amazon S3 or Strongspace. Cheers, Dana ============================================================================================================= To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.