I've been reading lately about how SSDs are not so reliable and that even HDDs will eventually fail. Does this mean that the most reliable form of storage is cloud storage? If so, what do you recommend?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Storage / Backup
- Thread starter Sebastian79
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, but the liability is on the service provider. So, I assume there will not come a day when you will find your files vanished off their site, right?
You need to read the SLA to see what that is - it's not what you think.
But iCloud for example is made up of enterprise class storage arrays.
These are raided and have hot spares and most importantly replicated/backed up to an alternate location for redundancy.
Nothing you cant do yourself. I have 2 DS416 synology boxes with raided volumes that replicated between other.
Depends what you want to do.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/ssd-reliability-in-the-real-world-googles-experience/
But iCloud for example is made up of enterprise class storage arrays.
These are raided and have hot spares and most importantly replicated/backed up to an alternate location for redundancy.
Nothing you cant do yourself. I have 2 DS416 synology boxes with raided volumes that replicated between other.
Depends what you want to do.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/ssd-reliability-in-the-real-world-googles-experience/
thanks for the link. I don't think I want to buy something like that, but then again it does make sense when you think about all the money you spent in monthly subscriptions...
I would never assume my data is safe, you're putting the responsibility of your data in someone else's hands. There are very reputable, and solid cloud companies, so don't get me wrong, but I would never assume anything when it comes to my data.
I prefer to manage my own risks, and data. Cloud storage is not bad/evil/reckless, nor is it a single solution that you can ignore other avenues of ensuring your data is safe.
It seems that moving your data from one storage to the other every few years is the only way to play it safe + keeping a second backup or better yet a third!
I prefer using a DAS for my main backup (time machine), I then also use Carbon Copy Clone backup on two external drives, one for home, and one that I take offsite.
I figure, its quicker for me to restore off a USB hard drive, then trying to download terabytes worth of data from the cloud. Just my $.02 but why spend money monthly when drives are cheap enough and the backing up is easy enough.
Physical failure is only one scenario that can cause data loss. It's perhaps the most visible because people remember when they lose an entire drive, but much more common is the routine data loss caused by accidental deletion, accidental file overwrites, and file corruption. No matter what media you use, backups are an essential part of the equation. Cloud storage is fine and very convenient, but you still need backups just the same as if you were using a local drive.
I have my important data backed up between a NAS, iCloud and OneDrive. About 100gigs of photos and documents. Don't think there will come a day where both Apple and Microsoft will go down simultaneously.
Do you recommend SSD or HDD for the external drives? (ignoring the price factor of course)
For backups - I see no reason to spend money on more expensive SSDs, when speed is not a concern. I opt for hard drives myself.
Follow the old IT adage of your data is only backed up even it is in 3 physical locations.
I use local Nas and cloud for critical data
I use local Nas and cloud for critical data
I have been thinking about creating my own personal cloud. Something that is tied into my home network, yet can be reach from anywhere on just about any device I have.
I've been looking into it and it seems you can get 3TB of data for around $150-$200.
What do you think about that Maflynn?
I've been looking into it and it seems you can get 3TB of data for around $150-$200.
What do you think about that Maflynn?
These are the 1TB options out there now.
Dropbox is less than $10 a month for 1TB
Microsoft's OneDrive 1TB is free with a Office365 subscription which is about $10 a month too
1TB of iCloud is about $10 a month too for 1TB
For me, I just point my OneDrive, iCloud and NAS to the same folder on my Mac. So I have The same files in 4 different locations. No need to fiddle around and I just keep that one folder organised.
Too troublesome and time consuming to rent a dedicated server for that purpose which runs into the hundreds of dollars every month. Also, renting a dedicated server is no more redundant than having a NAS at home.
Maybe I'm not using the correct nomenclature or there is a misunderstanding.
I'm talking about an external Hard Drive that is connected to your home network instead of a PC. Because it is integrated to your home network, it can be accessed from any device in that network, and some even have the ability to be accessed from anywhere.
The cost of the is only $200 or so.
That is pretty much the same thing as a NAS, or network attached storage, in your case its just a HDD attached to a router instead of a linux box.
In any case, if you want any sort of redundancy, you need at least 2 other copies of your data, aside from the copy that resides on your NAS. Any lesser and you're not going to have any sort of reliability for critical data.
I tried this for a while and gave up. I did not like the idea of external access to my network and running a system 24/7. Plus if there was a fire at home my data was gone. So I use a combination of storage at home with cloud backup.
When on the road I backup to cloud and the sync it locally to my NAS when I get home.
I agree and fully appreciate the concept of redundancy when protecting data. That being said, I'm wondering if a home cloud/personal cloud is a good element in that redundancy?
[doublepost=1502034783][/doublepost]
As stated with negativezero, a home/personal cloud would only be one element of my plan to protect my data.
For example I put all pics on a dedicated hard drive and store it in a fire proof safe, along with having them all on Drop Box.
Disclaimer: I am far from a backup expert. So, FWIW:
Both SSDs and HDDs fail. Some fail more often than others. Google arguably demonstrated that failure can sometimes be predicted but other times it comes without any warning - SMART is useful but it certainly has its limitations. It could be argued that the best backup plans will implement solutions that account for more than just physical disk failure.
If you were to implement a combined backup solution that uses more than one backup medium and more than one backup location, say a combination of storing User files on cloud storage, a bootable clone on one physical disk that is disconnected from the computer when not in use, and an incremental backup such as Time Machine on a different physical drive that is always connected to the computer, this could account for more of the causes of data loss than just one solution on its own. For example, this could help account not just for physical disk failure, but accidental file modification/deletion, surges/power loss, undetected file corruption that is unwittingly introduced to the clone & cloud, flood/fire, malware attacks, update problems that affect connected drives, theft, etc.
Synology products are absolutely awesome IMHO.
Both SSDs and HDDs fail. Some fail more often than others. Google arguably demonstrated that failure can sometimes be predicted but other times it comes without any warning - SMART is useful but it certainly has its limitations. It could be argued that the best backup plans will implement solutions that account for more than just physical disk failure.
If you were to implement a combined backup solution that uses more than one backup medium and more than one backup location, say a combination of storing User files on cloud storage, a bootable clone on one physical disk that is disconnected from the computer when not in use, and an incremental backup such as Time Machine on a different physical drive that is always connected to the computer, this could account for more of the causes of data loss than just one solution on its own. For example, this could help account not just for physical disk failure, but accidental file modification/deletion, surges/power loss, undetected file corruption that is unwittingly introduced to the clone & cloud, flood/fire, malware attacks, update problems that affect connected drives, theft, etc.
Synology products are absolutely awesome IMHO.