17 Dec
2010
17 Dec
'10
1:34 p.m.
On Friday 17 December 2010 13:11:58 ailo wrote:
On 12/17/2010 10:36 AM, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
Apart from the political discussions, amazon has a very nice pricing model for
disk-space in their s3-cloud. You don't pay for the ability to store X GB, you
pay for the actual space (and transfer bandwidth) you use.
Have fun,
Arnold
As for my university, as far as I know they use
some RAID system for
everyday and tapes for sensitive data. And they already had their whole
RAID fail at the same time.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
I've been busy setting up a system where all the data on my machines are
partly mirrored with each other and fully backed up to a home server
(not much unlike what google offers, though I don't keep a mail server).
There are two problems as I see it with this setup (other than working
out the mirroring/backup system).
The first is internet bandwidth. If you need more than one 100Mbit
connection it can get a little expensive (it will propably be worth it
in a couple of years, I think).
The other is the risc of lightning. Better to have the backup/sync
server at a remote location.
For keeping stuff in the cloud (which solves a lot of problems), I would
find it strange if not web hotels will try to compete with google, but
using addon software with windows/ mac/ linux instead.
In my mind all the prices for different services (apart from webpage
hosting, perhaps) are still much too high. The value of diskspace is
ridiculous with services like Dropbox and the like.
For important backups, a smaller diskspace will suffice. For audio
related projects, diskspace is kind of important to consider.
Google can offer a priceless service up to a certain disksize. I would
be prepared to pay for an "account" (not google), if I got just a little
more for my money, which I'm sure will happen in the coming few years.