Help with options for data back-up Raid SCSI?? Just some ideas

The data drives that failed were from each PC.
These were both older (cheap) large capcity drives.
They were both IDE

My SCSI drives are older, and have never had problems.
The SCSI drives store WinXP and program files (one drive for each)
Large SCSI drives are expensive, so I chose IDE for storage.
SCIS is faster, so I have 15k rpm (smaller drives) for WinXP and
program files.

"Fishhead" wrote in message
oups.com...
The data drives that failed were from each PC.
These were both older (cheap) large capcity drives.
They were both IDE

My SCSI drives are older, and have never had problems.


They will eventually. BUT that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

The SCSI drives store WinXP and program files (one drive for each)
Large SCSI drives are expensive, so I chose IDE for storage.
SCIS is faster, so I have 15k rpm (smaller drives)

Triple cost small 15K RPM SCSI HDs only outperform single top [S]ATA HDs by
a small amount in video/photo editing performance. [S]ATA RAID 0 is big and
inexpensive and blows a single expensive 15K RPM SCSI HD away in video
editing and photo editing performance. You bought the myth of SCSI.

The threat I am worried about is HD failure..
Why wouldn't 2 PC's cover this??

Maybe cause my SCSI drives are 15k and my IDE are 7.2k

"Ron Reaugh" wrote in message
...

"Fishhead" wrote in message
oups.com...
The data drives that failed were from each PC.
These were both older (cheap) large capcity drives.
They were both IDE

The SCSI drives store WinXP and program files (one drive for each)
Large SCSI drives are expensive, so I chose IDE for storage.
SCIS is faster, so I have 15k rpm (smaller drives)

Triple cost small 15K RPM SCSI HDs only outperform single top [S]ATA HDs by
a small amount in video/photo editing performance. [S]ATA RAID 0 is big and
inexpensive and blows a single expensive 15K RPM SCSI HD away in video
editing and photo editing performance. You bought the myth of SCSI.

Clueless. He uses SCSI for the OS, not video.

The prefered configuration for video/audio production is independent 7200 drives, not RAID 0.

"Fishhead" wrote in message
oups.com...
The threat I am worried about is HD failure..
Why wouldn't 2 PC's cover this??

Common malware(virus/trojan/hacker/etc.) attack or theft or physical
calamity to the room including lightening/power surge are primary threats to
the HDs. OFFSITE BACKUP covers all these AND it covers a HD failure.

"Fishhead" wrote in message
oups.com...
Maybe cause my SCSI drives are 15k and my IDE are 7.2k


Late model top 7200K RPM [S]ATA are faster in single user workstation
including video/photo editing usage than an early 15K RPM SCSI HD. Then
there's the 10K RPM [S]ATA Raptor.

Fishhead wrote in message
oups.com...

I have no back-up...
unless I start buring to DVD...

I could care less about an day/hour of work.
It is the total drive

Then completely automated backup to another drive is the answer.

Best done overnight because otherwise the backup will
be a significant load on the system while you are using it.

Best done to a SATA drive because you can choose to
unplug that, hot, if you say want to provide a bit more
security against theft of the system when you are out etc.

If you are confident that you cant be robbed and that the risk
of fire and flood are very low, an internal drive would be fine.

RAID is no use to you, its more hassle than its worth.

Fishhead wrote in message
oups.com...

The data drives that failed were from each PC.
These were both older (cheap) large capcity drives.
They were both IDE

OK, then it was likely bad luck that you lost 2 in 4 days.

My SCSI drives are older, and have never had problems.
The SCSI drives store WinXP and program files (one drive for each)
Large SCSI drives are expensive, so I chose IDE for storage.
SCIS is faster, so I have 15k rpm (smaller drives) for WinXP
and program files.

You dont actually need the higher speed for XP and program files.

"Eric Gisin" wrote in message
...
"Ron Reaugh" wrote in message
...

"Fishhead" wrote in message
oups.com...
The data drives that failed were from each PC.
These were both older (cheap) large capcity drives.
They were both IDE

The SCSI drives store WinXP and program files (one drive for each)
Large SCSI drives are expensive, so I chose IDE for storage.
SCIS is faster, so I have 15k rpm (smaller drives)

Triple cost small 15K RPM SCSI HDs only outperform single top [S]ATA HDs
by
a small amount in video/photo editing performance. [S]ATA RAID 0 is big
and
inexpensive and blows a single expensive 15K RPM SCSI HD away in video
editing and photo editing performance. You bought the myth of SCSI.

Clueless. He uses SCSI for the OS, not video.

Gisin troll gets it wrong as usual. Expensive SCSI for the OS drive in
single user workstation usage contributes little to performance over an
[S]ATA HD.

The prefered configuration for video/audio production is independent 7200
drives, not RAID 0.

Even idiots get a true/false right half the time.