<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"></head><body ><div style='font-size:10pt;'><br><div id="1"><br>---- On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 19:21:00 +0100 <b>Raymond Wagner<raymond@wagnerrp.com></b> wrote ---- <br></div><br><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid #0000FF; padding-left: 6px; margin:0 0 0 5px"> <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <div>On 7/22/2014 1:28 PM, Joseph Fry wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:CAAJE3StXWO2N9ME=FY5f<a href=" mailto:rwpo3aukac2xyn7_s4eu7njzhvdadq@mail.gmail.com"="" target="_blank">rWpO3AuKAc2xYN7_S4eU7njzhvDAdQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <div dir="ltr"> <div> <div> <blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div dir="ltr"> <div> <div> <div> <blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">IE> After facing a 2nd green drive failure since January, I began<br> IE> dreaming of using SSDs as long-term storage. Just curious if<br> IE> anyone's using them as storage for video libraries.<br> <br> Did you consider using a RAID-Array? Cost is much lower and dying<br> drives will not give you a headache. I am using RAID for many years as<br> home storage and never had a data loss or recovery headaches.<br> <span></span><br> </blockquote> </div> <br> </div> </div> <div>Considered it, but have also read threads where some think it's overkill for Myth.<br> </div> </div> <br> </blockquote> <div> </div> <div>RAID is overkill for Myth. But backups are not.</div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> On the contrary, for an end user, redundancy is much easier and cheaper to implement than backups. If all you want to do is protect against a single drive failure, all you need is one extra drive. Backups require at minimum double the amount of storage, and proper backups involve multiple times the amount of storage in rotation.<br> <br> <blockquote cite="mid:CAAJE3StXWO2N9ME=FY5f<a href=" mailto:rwpo3aukac2xyn7_s4eu7njzhvdadq@mail.gmail.com"="" target="_blank">rWpO3AuKAc2xYN7_S4eU7njzhvDAdQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <div dir="ltr"> <div> <div> <div>ensures that the most valuable data is available even if you accidentally do something stupid (rm -rf /)</div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> That's the real issue. Data backups exist ONLY to protect from corruption and deletion. Filesystem corruption is very unlikely to happen, and when it does, will most likely just result in minor decoding artifacts. Is protecting your recordings from yourself really important enough to warrant the expense of backups?<br> <br></div></blockquote><br>exactly my point of view. going with the age old saying; Raid is not backup. dont confuse the terms. This is the reason i chose raid1 (madam 2x 3tb WD greens with BTRFS LVM ontop, fwiw) - drive failure reasons.<br>as for backups, since my mythtv BE is multipurpose, i do backup the fileserver side of the box; more so for bandwidth reasons - 750gb of data will take a while on 6meg DSL. Thats just a normal filecopy to an esata caddy i have, across multiple old drives.<br></div></body></html>