FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-21-2012, 04:36 PM
Sian Mountbatten
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

I am going to buy a big USB hard drive to backup films, music and
photos. In fact, I might backup the system (at least, the list of
packages installed).


Anybody out there tried a 2TB USB hard drive? What did you use as filing
system. I am intending to use ext4. Any comments?

--
Sian Mountbatten
ex-Algol 68 specialist


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: jmunm9$90r$2@speranza.aioe.org">http://lists.debian.org/jmunm9$90r$2@speranza.aioe.org
 
Old 04-21-2012, 05:34 PM
Camaleón
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 17:36:28 +0100, Sian Mountbatten wrote:

> I am going to buy a big USB hard drive to backup films, music and
> photos. In fact, I might backup the system (at least, the list of
> packages installed).

If you're using the disk to make a backup for one machine, USB (better
3.0) can be convenient and easy but despite the interface, have you
considered in buying a good external USB enclosure -with external power-
and a separate hard disk? I find it to be a better solution than those
"ready-made-and-closed" external tera-disks.

> Anybody out there tried a 2TB USB hard drive? What did you use as filing
> system. I am intending to use ext4. Any comments?

For home, I use an internal SATA disk (500 GiB) as primary backup (ext3)
and then a NAS system as a secondary (backup for the backup) level of
security, also formatted with ext3 which is the best option available for
the NAS (only ext2, ext3 or FAT32 is allowed ;-) ).

I'm against big partitions (500 GiB is the limit I have auto-imposed to
my systems) so I would make 4 slices and spread the data over them.
Anyway, I don't think you are going to have any problem to manage a
single partition of 2 TiB, even more if you plain to store plain data
(not a bootable system) there.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: jmur37$g9$20@dough.gmane.org">http://lists.debian.org/jmur37$g9$20@dough.gmane.org
 
Old 04-21-2012, 07:45 PM
"tv.debian@googlemail.com"
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On 21/04/2012 18:36, Sian Mountbatten wrote:

I am going to buy a big USB hard drive to backup films, music and
photos. In fact, I might backup the system (at least, the list of
packages installed).

Anybody out there tried a 2TB USB hard drive? What did you use as filing
system. I am intending to use ext4. Any comments?


Hi, I use seagate's ST2000DL003-9VT1 (it's some kind of "eco" drive, but
still fast) for that purpose, in raid1. No complains. I have had
disastrous experiences with WD 2TB drives (those "green" monstrosity).

I use gpt partition table, with LUKS and RAID without trouble.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4F930E50.60803@googlemail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4F930E50.60803@googlemail.com
 
Old 04-22-2012, 08:01 PM
Jon Dowland
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 05:36:28PM +0100, Sian Mountbatten wrote:
> I am going to buy a big USB hard drive to backup films, music and
> photos. In fact, I might backup the system (at least, the list of
> packages installed).
>
> Anybody out there tried a 2TB USB hard drive? What did you use as
> filing system. I am intending to use ext4. Any comments?

You are conflating backup and filing here. If you are using it for
backup, set up a large partition (larger than the source partition)
and use something like rdiff-backup, bup or duplicity to back up
your source machine(s) onto the disk. Don't file onto the disk, file
on your computer and use the disk for backup.

Or, if you are to use the disc for filing, be aware that it can fail
just as an internal disc can.

If you really want to use the drive for both backup and filing
(perhaps you have more multimedia than you can fit on your computer's
internal storage), I'd recommend using seperate LVM logical volumes,
one purely for backup and the other for files, and still be aware
that you haven't solved the backup issue for the filing partition.
(maybe you can burn those to disc and divide up your file storage into
directories corresponding to the discs the backups reside on; a tool
such as 'datapacker' could help you with this)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120422200158.GC11237@debian">http://lists.debian.org/20120422200158.GC11237@debian
 
Old 04-24-2012, 02:02 AM
Philipp Schneider
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:50:02 +0200, tv.debian@googlemail.com wrote:

> Hi, I use seagate's ST2000DL003-9VT1 (it's some kind of "eco" drive, but
> still fast) for that purpose, in raid1. No complains. I have had
> disastrous experiences with WD 2TB drives (those "green" monstrosity). I
> use gpt partition table, with LUKS and RAID without trouble.

What kind of disastrous experiences did you have with the WD drives?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: jn51kc$3mr$1@dont-email.me">http://lists.debian.org/jn51kc$3mr$1@dont-email.me
 
Old 04-24-2012, 08:32 AM
"tv.debian@googlemail.com"
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On 24/04/2012 04:02, Philipp Schneider wrote:

On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:50:02 +0200, tv.debian@googlemail.com wrote:


Hi, I use seagate's ST2000DL003-9VT1 (it's some kind of "eco" drive, but
still fast) for that purpose, in raid1. No complains. I have had
disastrous experiences with WD 2TB drives (those "green" monstrosity). I
use gpt partition table, with LUKS and RAID without trouble.


What kind of disastrous experiences did you have with the WD drives?




I was a happy WD user with their "caviar black" line, until I started
getting drives which where either faulty "out of the box" or quickly
dying on me (they where 500GB and 1TB). Arguably every manufacturer as
it shares of defective drives, during the same period I was also bitten
by a Seagate firmware bug (quickly patched) rendering the drives
suddenly unusable at boot time without any prior warning, just to keep
things in fair perspective.
After those bad batches I changed my WD drives for Samsung's, they were
both cheap and efficient, and since they are still running I can now say
reliable too.
Later I felt the need to try so called "green drive" for use in external
enclosures and NAS, due to their lower power consumption and operating
temperature. I gave WD caviar green "EAR*" series a shot (1TB and later
2TB), long story short the performances where very poor, the
implementation of "advanced format" would render them unusable
(incompatible) with most NAS, and tricky to partition in Linux. Even
when properly running the operating temperature wasn't a lot different
from my Samsung's drive, the performance far behind, the price higher,
and the reliability no better. In raid the drives would be regularly
kicked out of the volume, for no apparent reason. After loosing time in
forum and tech support I sent the drives back, got Seagate's "Eco green"
as a replacement (seagate bought samsung's disk business around that
time), and they are running fine where the WD weren't.


I am no google, on my comparatively very small yearly drive consumption
every bad series becomes a statistical monster, it would probably not be
noticeable on a bigger scale. Still search engines aren't short on WD
"green" bad stories.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4F96650E.1090708@googlemail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4F96650E.1090708@googlemail.com
 
Old 04-24-2012, 11:20 AM
Alberto Fuentes
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On 21/04/12 19:34, Camaleón wrote:

I'm against big partitions (500 GiB is the limit I have auto-imposed to
my systems) so I would make 4 slices and spread the data over them.
Anyway, I don't think you are going to have any problem to manage a
single partition of 2 TiB, even more if you plain to store plain data
(not a bootable system) there.



I have ext4 in one partition of 1.8 Tb or so. It takes about 40 min to
chkfs... just something to bear in mind...


Its very convenient to have a large sack to toss the stuff, but it has
its own set of drawbacks


greets!
aL


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4F968C65.4070602@qindel.com">http://lists.debian.org/4F968C65.4070602@qindel.com
 
Old 04-24-2012, 01:25 PM
Camaleón
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:20:05 +0200, Alberto Fuentes wrote:

> On 21/04/12 19:34, Camaleón wrote:
>> I'm against big partitions (500 GiB is the limit I have auto-imposed to
>> my systems) so I would make 4 slices and spread the data over them.
>> Anyway, I don't think you are going to have any problem to manage a
>> single partition of 2 TiB, even more if you plain to store plain data
>> (not a bootable system) there.
>
>
> I have ext4 in one partition of 1.8 Tb or so. It takes about 40 min to
> chkfs... just something to bear in mind...

Good point :-)

As an aside note, I've been using ReiserFS in all of my linux boxes (in
both, servers and workstations) for the "/" partition and I never had to
face the long waits at booting till the fsck ends. I know that ReiserFS
(v3) is not actively developed (just security patches) and performs
better for small files but I'm considering in moving ext3 to XFS or
another mature file system (JFS) because the annoying and absurdly long
time fsck takes.

> Its very convenient to have a large sack to toss the stuff, but it has
> its own set of drawbacks

Yes, and I'm against partitioning too much but considering the big sizes
of the actual hard disks it has become a must, also to minimize a
filesystem corruption in a partition that can affect the whole data.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: jn69je$gop$1@dough.gmane.org">http://lists.debian.org/jn69je$gop$1@dough.gmane.org
 
Old 04-24-2012, 01:45 PM
Sian Mountbatten
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On 24/04/12 14:30, Camaleón wrote:

On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:20:05 +0200, Alberto Fuentes wrote:


On 21/04/12 19:34, Camaleón wrote:

<snip>

Yes, and I'm against partitioning too much but considering the big sizes
of the actual hard disks it has become a must, also to minimize a
filesystem corruption in a partition that can affect the whole data.


I'm also against partitioning too much. I've had very little trouble
with hard disk drives over the years; I've certainly had no crashes or
file corruption.


Not so long ago, my new SSD failed and I had to re-install the system.
Unfortunately, I had not backed up all my data, so I lost some.


While I wait for the new 2 TB HDD, I am copying data across my home LAN
to my laptop which has a 120 GB HDD. I was using the WiFi network
provided by the computer consultants downstairs: it gave me 1.2 MB/s
transfer rate. When I succeeded in getting the Ethernet working, I got 9
MB/s. I've now checked the ethernet NICs at both ends and they are both
Gigabit devices. So I've ordered a 5m Cat5e ethernet cable from Amazon
which should give me 120 MB/s transfer rate. That would certainly make
it convenient for security backups.


I've also installed ukopp which looks as though it will do incremental
backups.


I intend using the 2 TB HDD for three purposes:-
1. Full security backups
2. Incremental security backups
3. Archival backups

Last night, I split two film files into 4 GB pieces and used Brasero to
write the pieces to 4 DVD+RW discs. So that's another, safe, way of
backing up my data. I am now going to write my 4.3 GB music collection
to another DVD+RW disc.


Greetings
--
Sian Mountbatten
ex-Algol 68 specialist


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: jn6apu$760$1@speranza.aioe.org">http://lists.debian.org/jn6apu$760$1@speranza.aioe.org
 
Old 04-24-2012, 03:03 PM
Camaleón
 
Default 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 14:45:34 +0100, Sian Mountbatten wrote:

> On 24/04/12 14:30, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:20:05 +0200, Alberto Fuentes wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/04/12 19:34, Camaleón wrote:
> <snip>
>> Yes, and I'm against partitioning too much but considering the big
>> sizes of the actual hard disks it has become a must, also to minimize a
>> filesystem corruption in a partition that can affect the whole data.
>
> I'm also against partitioning too much. I've had very little trouble
> with hard disk drives over the years; I've certainly had no crashes or
> file corruption.

Yes, but it's dangerous. By not partitioning a tebibyte hard disk we're
exposing gratituously our beloved data.

> Not so long ago, my new SSD failed and I had to re-install the system.
> Unfortunately, I had not backed up all my data, so I lost some.

The first thing a computer user has to learn (and I'm talking in general,
not specifically to you) is "backup, backup and backup". Then you can
start to play and enjoy your system. People tend to treat their computers
like "washing machines" and heck, not, is not the same :-)

> While I wait for the new 2 TB HDD, I am copying data across my home LAN
> to my laptop which has a 120 GB HDD. I was using the WiFi network
> provided by the computer consultants downstairs: it gave me 1.2 MB/s
> transfer rate. When I succeeded in getting the Ethernet working, I got 9
> MB/s. I've now checked the ethernet NICs at both ends and they are both
> Gigabit devices. So I've ordered a 5m Cat5e ethernet cable from Amazon
> which should give me 120 MB/s transfer rate. That would certainly make
> it convenient for security backups.

Yes, and that's why my primary backup is directly attached to one of the
SATA ports of the motherboard: speed between SATA buses is good enough
when using a powerful system. The average size of my /home backup is now
at ~10 GiB and I always do full (not incremental nor differential)
backups becasue 10 GiB is still a manageable size (although for servers
and workstations I do differential backups).

> I've also installed ukopp which looks as though it will do incremental
> backups.
>
> I intend using the 2 TB HDD for three purposes:-
> 1. Full security backups
> 2. Incremental security backups
> 3. Archival backups
>
> Last night, I split two film files into 4 GB pieces and used Brasero to
> write the pieces to 4 DVD+RW discs. So that's another, safe, way of
> backing up my data. I am now going to write my 4.3 GB music collection
> to another DVD+RW disc.

Yes, but I'm very reluctant when it comes to optical media: it's painly
slow, hard to deal with (requires from extra software) and data on them
does not last "forever" despite what advertising says (moreover,
rewritable media has a limited number of writes).

Greetings,

--
Camaleón


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: jn6fbq$got$3@dough.gmane.org">http://lists.debian.org/jn6fbq$got$3@dough.gmane.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:37 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org