Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Trikky]

I would like some opinions on which way to go when setting up my DNS-323.  It has 2x 2TB EARS drives (those drives being purchased before I installed the 323, and before I learned about this forum), but which seem to have been formatted without any problems with firmware 1.09.

My goal is to use one of the drives for data storage (noncritical data, as well as backups of data from my computer or another drive) and back THAT drive up to the second drive.  I could do this by using either RAID 1 or a scheduled backup with a third-party application.  In the event that something were to happen with one of the drives or, heaven forbid, the DNS-323, I would also like to be able to take the surviving drive/s and load them into another enclosure and use the files - preferably directly from the drives.

I'm presuming that would be possible with STANDARD mode, but would that be possible if I set up the DNS-323 with RAID 1? Speaking with one of the IT guys in my office today, he advised that it would be, but I'm presuming that has a lot to do with the NAS or the enclosure itself.

Thanks for any clarification or opinions you would like to share.

[dcx_badass]

I pulled a drive from my DNS-323 Raid 1 and connected it to my PC fine and read the files using this:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2read/

[Wiggs]

(...) back THAT drive up to the second drive.  I could do this by using either RAID 1 (...)

RAID is not backup.  I am sure you will be accosted in this forum on this very point.  RAID is for hardware redundancy to reduce downtime... it is not a backup solution. 

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID


Regards,

Wiggs

[JavaLawyer]

I'm presuming that would be possible with STANDARD mode, but would that be possible if I set up the DNS-323 with RAID 1? Speaking with one of the IT guys in my office today, he advised that it would be, but I'm presuming that has a lot to do with the NAS or the enclosure itself.

Thanks for any clarification or opinions you would like to share.

RAID 1 is a mirror, where the minute you write or delete data from HDD1, the data is instantly written/deleted from HDD2.  Whereas, if you format both drives in Standard mode, you can schedule a daily, weekly, or ad hoc backup.

That said, if you accidentally delete a directory from HDD1, a RAID 1 solution provides no means of recovery because the data is instantly deleted on both drives.  Using Standard mode, you can recover your HDD1 data as long as the scheduled backup hasn't occurred.  Depending on the backup solution you use (for Standard mode), the backup on HDD2 can retain all of your deleted files or delete them to mirror HDD1.  In that sense, RAID 1 isn't a reliable backup solution.
 

[Trikky]

Thank you for your replies.  To clarify, I intend this appliance - however it is set up - to provide the backup to my computer data.  Since I have two drives, I think it makes sense to use one as the backup and the second as a redundancy option.  Essentially, a 'backup to my backup'. 

Disclaimer:  I know Raid itself provides redundancy, not backup. 

For me, one of the drives in the DNS is my backup, I just want to have an extra layer of protection for that backed up information.

Ultimately, I guess my question is which option would provide the highest level of protection for my backed up data, should either the DNS-323 itself, or one of the two drives contained therein, fail and I need to recover the data contained on the remaining drive/s?

Looking at what was written however, I get the impression that Standard formatting with a scheduled backup is likely the most effective method of accomplishing my goal.

Sorry for any confusion.

[fordem]

For me, one of the drives in the DNS is my backup, I just want to have an extra layer of protection for that backed up information.

Ultimately, I guess my question is which option would provide the highest level of protection for my backed up data, should either the DNS-323 itself, or one of the two drives contained therein, fail and I need to recover the data contained on the remaining drive/s?

Looking at what was written however, I get the impression that Standard formatting with a scheduled backup is likely the most effective method of accomplishing my goal.

Sorry for any confusion.

This actually a very important point.

Traditionally backups have been done to some form of removable media, and using some sort of media rotation scheme, the simplest of which is the grandfather-father-son - in a nut shell, there is backup drive, and at least three "backups" done at different times.

This allows for recovery should either the drive or the media fail - if the drive fails you replace it and restore from the most recent backup media, if the media fails you fall back to the "next most recent" media.

When doing a D2D or disk-to-disk backup this is not possible as the media is not removable and may be lost if the drive fails.

Using either RAID1 or a scheduled backup to a second disk does provide a second level of protection.

[JavaLawyer]

Using either RAID1 or a scheduled backup to a second disk does provide a second level of protection.

For other readers, I think it's worth noting that if he didn't have a primary backup, that RAID 1 wouldn't suffice and he'd be much better off with two standard volumes.

[dividedhighw]

Hey folks!

I'm a newbie to this forum, but not so in terms of technology, so here's my $0.02:

One thing to remember is that a true "backup" is supposed to save your butt if something "BAD" happens.  So, the traditional concept of having backup on removable media is an important one because you want to store "some" of your backups somewhere else (i.e. off-site).

This is because no matter how many backups one has, if they're all in the same location, fire, flood, earthquake, theft, etc, won't discriminate.  For example, if you have a fire, all your data in the same room/house/office, etc can be destroyed.  Similarly, if a thief decides to steal your server, they won't say, "Oh, the drives are RAID'd so I better leave one!"   

A typical backup regimen is one in which incremental backups are done in some period (say, daily), while full backups are done on a longer cycle (say, weekly) and selected full backups are stored off-site (say, monthly), on a rotational basis.

IMO, there's no such thing as a completely "foolproof" backup system ... depending on what you do, you'll either have more or less protection - that's all.

Cheers,
DH

[fordem]

Whilst removable media is nice, it's not essential in order to have an offsite backup - you can backup your data to a DNS-323 that is physically located elsewhere - it's simply a matter of network design and connection speed.

[dividedhighw]

@fordem: Absolutely agreed and thanks for pointing that out.  My main point was that (like removable media in the past), portability is an important factor when considering a "true" backup because (like Real Estate), location matters!

One motivation for me to post at all was the suggestion made by some that a standard setup in the NAS would allow you to "backup" by copying from one NAS drive to the other on a scheduled basis - I personally don't consider that fulfilling the spirit of "backup" and wanted to explain why.

Cheers,
DH

[JavaLawyer]

Adding this discussion, the simple act of backing up to another physical device (even in the same location) will mitigate the vast majority of technology related problems that typically cause data loss.

Although I consider all of my data important (and maintain a backup of everything on two NAS), I use a tertiary and quaternary backup schema (i.e. cloud and offline storage) for a subset of my data that I absolutely cannot afford to lose.  Isolating this critical data makes additional backups more tenable due to the smaller data footprint (100 MB versus ~8 TB).

[Trikky]

The input has been taken to heart.  After considering everything that was written, I've decided that I'm going to simply backup my computer to another external, then give it to some relatives to keep at their place, retrieving it on an occasional basis (1-2 weeks) to update changes.  Mission accomplished.  :-)

On the positive side, now I have an additional 2 TB or disposable storage space.   

[JavaLawyer]

Glad to help. 

I'm always amazed that most people maintain no backup, simply relying on their "C" drive to store everything.  The advent of the NAS is invaluable, the only downside being that many uninformed NAS owners are lulled into a false sense of security by RAID.

The input has been taken to heart.  After considering everything that was written, I've decided that I'm going to simply backup my computer to another external, then give it to some relatives to keep at their place, retrieving it on an occasional basis (1-2 weeks) to update changes.  Mission accomplished.  :-)

On the positive side, now I have an additional 2 TB or disposable storage space.   

[Trikky]

One more question, on the topic of off-site backups.  Since my plan is to use a physical drive and hand it to a trusted relative for safe keeping.  From there I intend to do semi-regular updates, either remotely (if that is technically possible with our internet connections and routers) or by retrieving the drive and connecting to my computer.

I could get an external drive for this purpose, but would it be logical to simply purchase a third internal drive and swap out the drives from the DNS-323?

Here's what I'm thinking:

Drive 1 - Volume 1, general share, not important data
Drive 2 - Backup purposes - some data from Volume 1 but mostly from desktop and laptop.  This would be pulled out and transferred offsite
Drive 3 - Backup purposes, Replacing Volume 2 on a rotating basis.

Drive 2 & 3 would be updated using a backup application with changes being archived.  I envision that this would allow me to keep the data fresh with minimal loss should something happen.

Then again, I'm not 100 certain it would work the way I'm planning.

Thanks again for your input.

[JavaLawyer]

Although your plan will "probably" work, it's never a good idea to start swapping internal hard drives.  It's best to use a storage medium that's intended for constant removal.  Why not just buy an external HDD for the third volume?