On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Richard L. Hess
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> It was always foolish to trust the only copy of a file to a server that
> you do control.
> Just because they've put lipstick on the pig and called it "The Cloud"
> doesn't mean you can assume it's any different from a server that you don't
> control. At some point "The Cloud" has to resolve to a piece of hardware.
> We're not shoving data into those puffy white things that float by,
> sometimes dropping rain or snow on us.
> At it's best, "The Cloud" implies a fault-tolerant distributed system
> which can withstand multiple failures and is geographically diverse. I
> wonder how many "Cloud" applications are really that well engineered and
> I did not feel comfortable after a tornado devastated downtown Goderich,
> Ontario last summer, so in addition to my two RAID 5 NAS units (one in each
> of two adjacent houses) for each piece of data, I added a steel ammo case
> full of notebook USB drives that get updated about every six months from
> the NAS units. These are kept across town (along a north-south axis as most
> tornadoes follow an east-west axis).
> The remote RAID 5 NAS unit is updated overnight from the local one over a
> fibre optic 100 Mb/s link (I'm too cheap to upgrade the media converters to
> gigabit), without propagating deletes, and some updates are not propagated
> (the theory being it's better to lose the edits than the original file).
> While I feel the pain of the people who lost data, and I'm sorry they lost
> data, I do not feel they were being responsible. I do know some people who
> rely on "cloud" backup, but if they were informed that their cloud backup
> was at risk, I'm certain (or at least I hope) they would migrate to local
> backup until they found another cloud. Personally, I am reasonably
> comfortable with three copies in three separate locations.
> Oh, and the steel ammo can might just protect those little notebook drives
> in USB cases from EMP should that scenario ever happen. Now, what would be
> left to read the drives???
> On 2012-01-31 9:58 AM, Don Cox wrote:
>> It was always foolish to trust the only copy of a file to a server that
>> you don't control.
> Richard L. Hess email: [log in to unmask]
> Aurora, Ontario, Canada (905) 713 6733 1-877-TAPE-FIX
> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
I think Don Cox has hit the nail on the head-you are always foolish to have
an only copy. I look with awe at Richard's approach, and wish I could do
it that way. I try to have multiple copies of anything important, and keep
some in the office and take some home. For those who rely entirely on the
cloud, The nice folks from Intuit, who make Quicken and TurboTax also have
an on-line payroll system, used by many thousands of businesses. Last year,
in the spring, I think, they had a massive failure, and payroll information
that was supposed to be redundant and distributed through several server
installations turned out not to be, and a number of people lost payroll
data. I wasn't one of them, and can only imagine what had to happen to
recreate the data. This happened to one of the big mainstream companies
that always advertises the merits of their system. Suffice it to say,
Intuit didn't advertise that they weren't 100% reliable.
Frank B Strauss, DMD