Backing Up a RAID Array

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
richi3d10

richi3d10

Honorable
Oct 30, 2012
155
0
10,710
Hi guys,

I have a software RAID 5 array that consists of 4x 2TB internal drives running on a debian machine. I was wondering what the best way to back it up would be, what I've been doing until now is just copying over the data the 3 external 2TB hard drives with rsync. I've been thinking about maybe adding another one and putting them in a RAID 5 array themselves and using that as a backup, on a separate machine maybe? I have had a few ideas, but none of them seem that practical and I was wondering if any of you guys had any suggestions?

Thanks,
Rich.
 
Solution
F


Yeah, it's sort of. but it is not as dangerous as RAID0 :)
It's a volume, where all the drives are append together and it is indiscriminate HDD's size, you can use OS's command to create it
It likes a back up with multiple disks, once it fill-out the current one it will go to the next one.

It won't lost entire volume if a drive is gone like RAID0, and you can recover DATA much easier than RAID0
It's also allowing to use ANY HDD: IDE, SATA, BIG. Small... Just a big pool...
Sort by date Sort by votes
popatim

popatim

Titan
Moderator
Dec 2, 2009
38,904
980
135,890
imo a raid 5 is fine as a hot backup but ideally you also want an offline backup for the truly important data. You know the data that you give anything to get back should a nearby lightning strike take out both you main and your backup arrays. By 'offline' what I mean is one not attached to anything electrical (power, phone, network, usb, esata...) like tapes & Optical disks.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
richi3d10

richi3d10

Honorable
Oct 30, 2012
155
0
10,710


OK, I could Have the external disks in a raid 5 array that I just assemble when it's time for backup and leave unplugged other than that?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
richi3d10

richi3d10

Honorable
Oct 30, 2012
155
0
10,710


Isn't span basically raid 0 but on a different architecture? I thought about using raid 0 (raid is easier under linux) but it seems riskier than raid 5?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

FireWire2

Distinguished
Oct 30, 2006
1,304
1
19,665


Yeah, it's sort of. but it is not as dangerous as RAID0 :)
It's a volume, where all the drives are append together and it is indiscriminate HDD's size, you can use OS's command to create it
It likes a back up with multiple disks, once it fill-out the current one it will go to the next one.

It won't lost entire volume if a drive is gone like RAID0, and you can recover DATA much easier than RAID0
It's also allowing to use ANY HDD: IDE, SATA, BIG. Small... Just a big pool of storage without redundant.

There are other options too:

a) You can can use this stand-alone RAID5
http://www.datoptic.com/ec/esata-usb3-0-hardware-raid-support-mac-windows-freebsd-linux-405.html
for external solution
b) or DIY HW Raid5 with this little controller:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004JPUZWU. it's independent from OS, drivers...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
richi3d10

richi3d10

Honorable
Oct 30, 2012
155
0
10,710


Ahh, I see. That's interesting, I might consider doing a spanned volume rather than raid 5 because it frees up some storage for me, plus it's less hassle. Is there a software for linux that you can recommend?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom