‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Backups Aren't Simple

359 points · 225 comments · afilipovski

  1. OroPla · · focus · HN ↗
    Bit rot was mentioned in the article, but then no solution was offered. I also haven't found a good solution, unfortunately. If you only have a couple of Terabytes you could create check sums of everything and then verify regularly, but I feel this approach doesn't scale very well if you have lots of data.
    1. GTP · · focus · HN ↗
      If you have lots of data, I would suggest using a filesystem designed for this, like ZFS or BTRFS. You would still have to spend in storage though, as ultimately protecting from bit rot requires redundancy.
      1. OroPla · · focus · HN ↗
        I do use btrfs, but I don't really understand how to use it to protect against bit rot. I tried to look into it at some point, but got overwhelmed. Did invest in two backup copies, one of them off site, though.

        However, looking at prices, I can see one of those backups just being dismantled to be used as more storage.

        1. suncore · · focus · HN ↗
          Zfs and btrfs will avoid corruption caused below the file system layer, not something like malware or misuse from a tired sysadmin. I run a tool called integrit that creates checksums and lets me detect non-wanted changes. I only run it on important stuff that does not change too much like photos and videos. Not fun to have to regularly check the log but it works fairly well. This could maybe be extended with automatic checking of the logs.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.