Should a backup server use RAID?
I was asked to set up a new backup web server making use of Symantec Backup Exec that shops to hard drive as opposed to tape, due to the fact that the backup dimension is growing out of tape ability.
I was asking yourself does it actually make good sense or exist any kind of benefits for the backup web server to be running RAID of any kind of type as it is the "backup"?
To me, the advantage is not that wonderful to warrant the included price.
I'm interested to see what others assume.
Use RAID - 10.
RAID - 5 is foolish for backup web servers, due to the fact that:
- The web server invests a lot of its non - still life time doing whole lots and also great deals of consecutive creates. Efficiency Matters
- Disk application often tends to increase with time, so if backup windows aren't something that you are bothering with currently, they likely will remain in the future
- The efficiency hit you obtain from running with a downed disk will certainly create back-ups to fall short
- The common justification for making use of RAID - 5 ("disks are sooo pricey, wah, wah") is 100% complete bunk for backup, due to the fact that you can make use of high - ability SATA disk
- SATA vs. SAS is lesser for backup, given that you are arbitrary I/O work is reasonably tiny
Not making use of RAID in all might serve, relying on whether you are utilizing your back-ups as a de facto archiving remedy or otherwise.
What price? Disk drives are economical and also Raid 1 is virtually criterion on motherboards currently.
In my point of view you can not be also mindful. I've obtained raid on my major growth equipment, I consistently make back-ups to my residence web server and also my residence web server makes an offsite backup every evening. If it is economical, very easy and also smooth I claim why not?
Imo, there is a substantial advantage to making use of raid.
If the backup equipment has a disk failing without raid after that you'll shed all your back-ups. How much time will it take you to restore them?
Additionally, what happens if you shed all your back-ups as a result of a disk failing, efficiently restore them, and afterwards require to locate something that was supported formerly yet obtained shed source of this disk failing.
If absolutely nothing else, disks are currently so economical that the price of an added disk to place the system in raid 5 will possibly set you back much less than your time in the occasion you required to recoup from a failing.
Today there are numerous degrees of backup, nearline and also offsite. Nearline is where you back up to disk. Below you can maintain numerous backup collections of very vital information near, while a duplicate obtains made from the backup web servers disks to tape and afterwards the tape obtains sent out offsite. This has numerous advantages:
- backup to disk is generally much faster
- You have a properly endless # of disk tools, where supporting to tape is generally constricted in the variety of heads you need to write at once
That claimed, you need to treat your backup web servers disks with the very same type of redundancy you treat your data source web server. Claim your data source web server falls short at noontime, you can rollback to the backup web servers ondisk duplicate from last evening and also do your recover, where you tapes could currently be a $250 emergency situation return from your offsite supplier.
You need to place RAID on every web server you run, IMHO, and also not that non RAID RAID - 0 crap.: -)
It definitely makes good sense to make use of RAID on your back web server given that you intend on saving the information on the web server, and also not tape.
I would certainly advise RAID 5, 1 or 10.
Think of it in this manner, disk drives will certainly fall short. With the correct RAID arrangement you are shielded versus information loss when this takes place. You change the unsuccessful disk drive and also the restore the RAID.
With out RAID defense when you disk drive passes away (at it will certainly pass away at some time) after that you have actually shed your back-ups.
Server computer systems need to have repetitive disks other than in really unique conditions (assume shelf after shelf of "scale out" 1U application web servers, like Google). A web server computer system w/o repetitive disks is a ticking time bomb.
That having actually been claimed, backup isn't backup unless it is off website and also offline. If it gets on - website yet offline (tapes in a cabinet) after that it is gone when the structure refute (see Cleaning soot out of a server. ). If it is off - website yet online after that it is at risk to strike and also "corruption".
And also currently, remain tuned for spiritual debates concerning disk versus tape, etc.
What are the probabilities of manufacturing web server and also backup web server hard drive falling short at the very same time? If they are psychically divided (i.e. out the very same power grid, etc) this opportunity is actually, actually reduced. So, I choose no RAID.
Certainly, see to it you have signals when backup web server is falling short.
Yes, simply do it. A disk drive is sometimes more probable to fall short than any kind of various other computer system part. By mosting likely to a RAID, you are shielding versus the one trouble that is more than likely to take place. Action the low price of a RAID arrangement (possibly much less than $500, thinking a reduced to tool - end web server) with the value of your information.
Having claimed that, I second what Evan Anderson claimed over. This definitely need to NOT be your only backup. Evan spoke about being off - website and also offline, and also I would certainly add redundancy to that checklist. You require to have numerous duplicates of your back-ups in instance of failing of your backup media, backup work, burglary, loss, went down media, etc.
Should you make use of RAID on a backup web server?
For redundancy, I would certainly not
If you are not accustomed to recovering details alterations of documents of your backup system and also you are afraid that you could need to do that in instance the backup system disks fall short. After that of course, I would certainly make use of RAID 5 or matching or perhaps striping and also matching.
The only factor to do this if you anticipate that the initial information could be inaccessible at the most awful feasible time.
For increasing disks right into one quantity (striping)
Maybe, yet realize, that if one disk passes away the whole array passes away.
I assume it is a far better technique to backup the backup web server. I recognize it appears foolish, yet bear with me. Backup the system disk, the arrangement documents and also the backup setups. In this way, if your backup web server fails you can be up asap.
(Edit: sorry, concerning the various other solution, I misinterpreted the inquiry)
I concur with what is been claimed currently, yet if you are making use of a raid with parity there is mosting likely to be a means of checking the wellness of the drives and also your backup information. The majority of adaptors or onboard controllers will certainly send cautions using syslog, windows occasions or e-mail.
If this box is merely mosting likely to toss a windows occasion when SMART reports a falling short drive after that it is much far too late.
Remodeling the back-ups needs to take longer (male hr price) than a raid controller and also a couple of added SATA drives.
This very relies on what you think of 'backup'. ¢
If the objective is simply to have a web server with "live" information replicate from various other web servers on this web server, after that making use of raid on this backup web server is virtually pointless has, if you shed it, information are still readily available on web servers. In this instance you simply require to have some extra disk to be able to make the backup web server back on-line quickly if a disk fails.¢
If the objective is to archive backup while. I suggest doing a backup daily, and also maintain it for a month, a year approximately. After that of course, you intend to make use of raid due to the fact that if you shed a disk you will certainly shed archive. If it is essential for you to be able to recover information from a X week ago backup, you might additionally backup this 'backup/archive' to an additional web server or to tape (tape is quite possibly for long period of time archiving) (and also away certainly)
Backup to disk has value. While I am strongly on the tape side of the argument. I will certainly claim this nonetheless, if your backup quantities are solitary disks without redundancy you will at some point shed all your information. Due to the fact that your disk will at some point fall short.
I intend it relies on the nature of your demand for back-ups regarding whether backup to disk is actually an ideal remedy. If you do not require your information off website, and also you uncommitted concerning calamity recuperation, or survivability of your information over a long period of time after that tape isn't essential. I absolutely have back-ups that never ever leave disk, and also never ever leave the information facility, yet they exist to deal with customer removal mistake.
Additionally just how do you grow out of tape ability? That is the elegance of tape, you can constantly get an additional tape. That does call for that you have a tape changer of some type however.