Slashdot Log In
Easy, Reliable Distributed Storage and Backup?
from the grandma-needs-those-pictures-of-her-cat dept.
Related Stories
Use the pr0n method! (Score:4, Funny)
Rename your data to 'Barely legal college girls having first time sex - XXX Vol1/256.r001' and use p2p to spread them all over the world!
Re:Use the pr0n method! (Score:4, Funny)
It's funny , but it might be practical in way.
It's possible to put data in images , so why not in a video.
You just take something highly demanded ( could be porn , could be a movie ) , and punt your data in it , well encrypted and without anyone knowing it.
The file gets shared because of the content people want to see , and if you ever lose your data you just lookup the file via P2P , and you have it back.
I can tell you how I solve it in a business (Score:5, Informative)
I can tell you how I solve it in a business context, but whether or not it could be scaled down to personal I'm not sure.
The problem: 2 sites each with 70-100GB of data needs offsite backup with similar criteria to your own. Bandwidth available to these sites is 2-4Mbps. The only OS involved is Linux, though I'm sure Windows could be shoehorned in somehow. A third site which has a tape streamer and someone to take tapes offsite is available. Data protection legislation means that storing it with a hosted service is illegal unless I encrypt it myself before sending it offsite - I'm only aware of one tool which claims to be able to do this and still send data as a binary delta (it uses the rsync library) and that tool is still not particularly common in Linux distributions and not very widely used. I'm nervous of trusting my backups to a tool that isn't on heavy use, particularly if strong encryption is being employed.
The Solution: A server in the third site and some judicious scripting with rsync allows it to mirror the data in the other two sites. The first sync is fairly painful, of course, but provided you don't have too much data regularly changing subsequent syncs aren't too bad. The server is backed up to tape which provides versioning capability so if someone only realises that they lost a file a week after the fact it can still be restored,
Initial effort to set up was pretty great but now it's done it JFW and requires no brain power whatsoever to run on a daily basis. I can make the data available over the VPN (of course the access speed will be dog slow) more-or-less immediately and I can make it available at LAN speed by copying it to a hard disk and courier it to the remote office in under 48 hours. A full restore of 100GB across a 2Mbps connection will take at least 4-5 days.
Two questions (Score:4, Informative)
You're asking two questions. The first is that you want backup, so that all their data just gets thrown somewhere and they lose the last few days' work their hard drive dies. You don't even necessarily want this on the network; just back up to a DVD-R every so often, and take every month's DVD-R offsite (a friend's house, a bank's vault, whatever). There's lots of backup software for this. Most can do fancy stuff like incremental backups. You can probably find something opensource you can host for your friends and family on a decently-available server.
The second question is networked file storage, where you don't care about automatically archiving files, but you do want frequent access and a good UI. For this I recommend something like Dropbox [getdropbox.com], which has good support for OS integration and a web interface.
Re:Two questions (Score:5, Insightful)
If you try to roll backup and distributed file-storage into the same application, you're not going to get anything useful. Aunt Sally is going to want every single file including her OS and her tax returns backed up, in case her hard drive dies, but only wants the photos -- and only some of the photos, actually -- to be visible to Grandma Suzie. If Suzie can see every file on Sally's computer, and the entire history of each file, she's not going to be able to browse the photos in a way that's at all intuitive.
And worse yet, if Sally wants to send out links to her photos to fifteen of her friends by e-mail, she needs some sort of interface to mark parts of her backup as world-readable but the rest (like her passwords and e-mail) not. If the network backup program even lets you do this, it won't give Sally a UI that she'll be able to figure out.
You can certainly get network backup services: Mozy was mentioned in an earlier comment.
If you rethink your requirements in terms of your goals, you'll probably find that both rolled into one isn't what you want, and not just because a product doesn't exist at the moment that does that — a product that does that can't possibly have a good UI. If they shouldn't notice or care about how backups are being made, how are they going to figure out how to share photos with each other?
Re:Dropbox (Score:5, Insightful)
Dropbox is absolutely fantastic as a sync tool (and also has some degree of versioning), but there's no practical way as of yet to make it into a full-system backup. When 'watch folders' show up, it'll get a lot closer, but like any web-based system, it becomes impractically slow for anyone dealing with lot of data. Even digital snapshots add up quickly with the resolution of the point-and-shoot cameras, never mind if there's an actual photographer shooting RAW.
JungleDisk with Amazon S3 Storage (Score:3, Informative)
raised to the ground.
Wow. How far below ground is your house?
"Only wimps use backup. Real men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it."
God
you haven't thought this through (Score:5, Informative)
Backup isn't the same as sharing. And do you want actual replication or merely fault tolerance to node failure? Actual n-fold replication means you're going to pay n times the amount of money for storage. And why do you insist on one application to do everything?
My suggestion: set up automatic backups to one of the many backup services on the net. They worry about how to replicate your data, you don't have to. For the same service to support both backup and sharing is hard and it's probably a bad idea. It's much easier if you know that the backup service simply cannot access the contents of any of your files.
For sharing, use services designed for that: Flickr Pro, Picasa, Google Docs, whatever. They are designed for sharing, they know about users and permissions, and they can only publish what you actually upload to them.
As for Cleversafe, the idea is as old as forward error correction, but the economics and management never seem to quite work out. And basically, you're getting the same functionality from hosted storage: Amazon, Google, Box.NET, etc. are already figuring out how to keep your data available and secure, and are probably doing a better job than you could do with a homebrew system.
Re:you haven't thought this through (Score:5, Insightful)
I want distributed backups with several, for lack of a better word, working copies checked out on different machines.
Aha, now I figured out why we're all misunderstanding you. Those aren't backups. "Backups" to my ears means that you copy the entire contents of your disk or your Documents folder nightly onto tape or some other archival medium, so that in case of hardware failure you have something to restore from. Potentially you also keep prior versions around. The tapes are stored in a corner somewhere because they're never actually accessed except in an emergency, and they're destroyed after a few months.
What you want isn't backups, since it doesn't make sense for different people to share backups any more than it makes sense for different people to share a single networked hard disk or networked home directory. You just want a distributed file storage system, with automatic syncing / commits.
rdiff-backup and chironfs (Score:4, Informative)
The subject says it all:
- rdiff-backup to backup your data one backup server.
- chironfs to clone the file system to another remote server.
rdiff-backup runs on *nix and windows (with the help of Cygwin).
Once set up, rdiff-backup needs virtually no maintenance. If needed, setup Nagios to warn you if things run afoul.
Used this for years, never disappointed me so far!
http://www.bacula.org/ [bacula.org]
Runs pretty tight (low bandwidth), supports channel encryption and datastore encryption, can even create Bare Metal Recovery disks. I have a server room with LTO3 tape drives that I use to backup my clients' incremental data changes nightly, including Linux, Mac and Windows clients and servers. I have VPN's out to each client, so don't use the built-in channel encryption, but I maintain a keypair for each client.
Backup only, but I
We're not talking terabytes here - my ISP would pwn me if that was going on, but I do circa 20G of data changes every night from clients. Some of them are laptops that are not always on or connected. Most are friends and family PC's, so it backs up when it can. I have to do almost no maintenance apart from changing a tape occasionally. The backup client is tiny and unobtrusive, even when running. On Windows it uses VSS, so it is reliable.
I have had a number of panic phone calls (esp from my kids at Uni) who have lost a thesis or the like and are utterly amazed when, after a few clicks over the phone they look at their webmail and yesterday's version is in their inbox. That's what it's all about! I am the god of lost data! Which, of course, works for me.
Re:Bacula? (Score:4, Funny)
- plural of baculum.
Do you know what a baculum is? It is the penis bone found in most male mammals with the exception of humans.
Great product naming!
As well as all of the standard things you'd expect from a networked filesystem (ACLs, authentication, and so on).
If you set up an AFS cell with your volumes replicated across a few remote servers and get your clients to connect to this cell then it should be fine. Set a cron job to take regular snapshots, and dump them to some offline medium periodically.
Our Stuff... a bit of a rambling post (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Wuala - www.wua.la - which is a distributed online storage system. You agree to store (encrypted) bits of others' files in exchange for the ability to do so on others' machines across the wuala network. It's free and pretty damn cool. They can explain it better than I can: http://wua.la/en/learn/why [wua.la]
Great technology, not so great product (Score:4, Insightful)
I watched their CTO's Google Talks presentation and it was really interesting. I got all excited, joined their beta only to realize that they - IMO - misused the technology they had and designed a rather mediocre product. Wuala wants to be a backup tool, a sharing tool, a social networking medium as well as few other things. In other words it lacks focus and wants to do everything - an approach that rarely works.
Re:Mozy? Duplicity? (Score:5, Insightful)
No Linux client, AFAIK (though I do run it on my MBP). It's become rather impractical for me as a photographer though, as sometimes I'll shoot enough photos that my internet connection would be completely maxed out for days on end trying to sync up the new data - and I have a decent-for-cable 1Mbps upload rate.
rsync to Amazon S3 might be an option, if only for cross-platform capabilities. No versioning though, but outside of Apple's Time Machine (obviously useless for Windows and Linux), you're not going to get that without some major headache. Any remote system is going to be horribly slow for the first sync with any typical internet connection, and quite possibly problematically slow for photographers, media horaders, and in general people with big hard drives.


