Back Up Post?

I saw a post here a few weeks ago, it had a backup unit that used about 3 or 4 hard drives in it, all in one small'ish case, it was about $1000 to buy, does anyone have that link, I can't find it. Tnx

Hey Patrick,

Here is the thread about the system I use:

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13603

The one I use has now been superseeded (and they are also much cheaper) - but the company do a good job - so I would look at their more recent projects.

There are also many more comments and recommendations as you go down the thread.

Alex

Thanks, looking to bring somthing like this back with me.

The Data Robotics DROBO storage unit is quickly making the desktop RAID obsolete.

(By the way, I've been configuring driver level (software) and hardware RAID's since 1995 on both Mac and WINNT (my largest was a 1 terabyte 16 drive U2W SCSI RAID Level 3 monster for a graphics shop back in 1998); and this DROBO unit all but automated everything I know about high performance and redundancy.)

I saw a post here a few weeks ago, it had a backup unit that used about 3 or 4 hard drives in it, all in one small'ish case, it was about $1000 to buy, does anyone have that link, I can't find it. Tnx

Patrick,

The one that Eric mentioned in that post is the WiebeTech:

http://wiebetech.com/products/RTX400.php

Cheers

James

James,

The Wiebetech units are OK; but you still have to know how to choose a RAID configuration, else you'll lose a lot of read speed, write speed, and/or waste a lot of disk space.

That's why I like the DROBO units: They replaced my engineering work with artificial intelligence... And it works.

Also, in doing a cursory glance at the WiebeTech specs, I didn't see any S.M.A.R.T. monitoring support, which is critical to any disk drive beyond a teenager's gaming PC.

Cheers!

Dan

Patrick,

 

The one that Eric mentioned in that post is the WiebeTech:

 

http://wiebetech.com/products/RTX400.php

 

Cheers

James

I know that. I was answering the original question.

Cheers

James

While I like the idea of DROBO and think it's been a long time coming, being limited to USB2 and 20MB/sec basically means that you lose all that read and write speed guaranteed. As for wasting disk space, DROBO is going to waste it just like any RAID configuration will. DROBO may be easy, but it's capabilities are remarkably low. 20MB/sec is what a single laptop drive provides!

As for SMART, being involved in its development, I can tell you that it isn't nearly as good or critical as you think it is. Drive manufacturers aren't excited about triggering false positives that result in warranty claims. Frankly, I place little value in SMART because I have a backup plan. My Mac doesn't propagate SMART through its software RAID and I couldn't care less.

From a Mac perspective, I'm interested in what issues TimeMachine will have regarding storage. It requires an external disk drive. Does that mean no eSata? No software RAID? What are the performance issues? DROBO could be a nice TimeMachine drive is OS X requires little performance from that drive. I could easily see using it for that but I wouldn't want the whole machine to slow to a crawl waiting on USB2.

While I like the idea of DROBO and think it's been a long time coming, being limited to USB2 and 20MB/sec basically means that you lose all that read and write speed guaranteed.

As long as you're not writing hundreds of Photoshop files to it, 20 MByte/sec is OK -- That's fast & wide SCSI speed, in fact.

Also, FireWire 800 is just around the corner for them.

As for wasting disk space, DROBO is going to waste it just like any RAID configuration will. DROBO may be easy, but it's capabilities are remarkably low. 20MB/sec is what a single laptop drive provides!

But, for the average photographer that doesn't want to hire an IT consultant to set up protected storage, it's plenty good.

As for SMART, being involved in its development, I can tell you that it isn't nearly as good or critical as you think it is.

I didn't know you worked at IBM... Didn't that come out of Armonk, circa 1995, IIRC?

[qoute] Drive manufacturers aren't excited about triggering false positives that result in warranty claims.

F**k `em! If they built better drives, then they wouldn't have to worry to begin with!

Frankly, I place little value in SMART because I have a backup plan.

Of course I have a backup plan I set up at my customers' shops; and it's tested.

That being said, SMART is a valuable tool in that it allows me to schedule downtime to replace a drive about to fail, to schedule RAID rebuilds during off-peak hours instead of during peak times.

My Mac doesn't propagate SMART through its software RAID and I couldn't care less.

Are you using SoftRAID? I've been using it since Apple was the licensee back when they had System 7.5.1/Workgroup Server that shipped with the mighty Workgroup Server 9150/120. Also, I was a beta tester for Mark for SoftRAID versions 2.2, and 2.2.2... Last time I installed it on a G5 workstation last year, Mark promised me SMART support in a future version; though at the time he had his hands full with the transition to x86 Mac...

From a Mac perspective, I'm interested in what issues TimeMachine will have regarding storage. It requires an external disk drive. Does that mean no eSata? No software RAID? What are the performance issues? DROBO could be a nice TimeMachine drive is OS X requires little performance from that drive. I could easily see using it for that but I wouldn't want the whole machine to slow to a crawl waiting on USB2.

Starting back in 1996, right after Steve screwed most of my customers with the clone fiasco (want to buy a SuperMac that can only run System 7.6.1), I migrated most all of my customers to NT4, and then on into NT5, a/k/a Win2k... More than for any other reason, to get the robustness of Native Transactional File System (NTFS). The trick I used was to install the server version of NT4 & NT5, so that the AppleTalk stack would work; and also allow Macs to "find" the shared folders on the NT workstations.

PS: I'm the founder & moderator of The Mac-NT Mailing List: I started it in April 1999 and we have over 1300 subscribers worldwide!

Dan

Interesting and looks like something that is good for storage of photos, music etc. Couple of questions

1.) When you place drives into it do they need to be blank or if you have some with data does it spread it around all drives?

2.) More importantly, how loud is the unit? I have some that hold two drives and are real loud Alot louder than my G5

Thanks

Yes, the connection between the drive array/box and the computer needs to be faster than USB2 which isn't even good enough even for "small" files from a 35mm FF DSLR. The connection between the the Weibetech box is eSata

Cheers

James

I use a couple of Infrant/NetGear ReadyNAS systems for backup via network. Since pretty much every multi-drive system makes a lot of noise, these are located in a closet.

I use the WiebeTech as a local backup, and only turn it on when I want to initiate a manual backup.

I use a couple of Infrant/NetGear ReadyNAS systems for backup via network. Since pretty much every multi-drive system makes a lot of noise, these are located in a closet.

 

I use the WiebeTech as a local backup, and only turn it on when I want to initiate a manual backup.

Thanks for the info. Guess the quiet multi drive back up is always a dream

I use some of the SilverSata single drive bays, or the Granite digital, for drives that I keep on longer so I do not get too much noise then back up to louder enclosures.

As long as you're not writing hundreds of Photoshop files to it, 20 MByte/sec is OK -- That's fast & wide SCSI speed, in fact.

No, it's not. I can sustain 35MB/sec out of a single, 250GB 5400 rpm notebook drive. Fast, wide SCSI has been obsolete since the early '90s.

Also, FireWire 800 is just around the corner for them.

Future products are speculation and I doubt you're in a position to discuss their plans. The fact is that DROBO can't even keep up with USB2 which is capable of over 30MB/sec. DROBO is not limited by USB2 speeds! Their performance is atrocious.

But, for the average photographer that doesn't want to hire an IT consultant to set up protected storage, it's plenty good.

Don't be hysterical. Backup plans have never needed IT consultants. Plenty of photographers are more capable than many IT guys!

I didn't know you worked at IBM... Didn't that come out of Armonk, circa 1995, IIRC?

No, it didn't. SMART was a consortium effort. I did, however, work in the industry at the time and was the lead architect on server storage systems for a large systems vendor. I'm quite familiar with SMART and how little it does. SMART is a placebo.

F**k `em! If they built better drives, then they wouldn't have to worry to begin with!

I'm sorry you've missed the point, Dan. SMART is about "saying" they're doing something, not about "doing" something. Drive vendors ARE afraid of SMART false-positives but systems providers are terrified.

Of course I have a backup plan I set up at my customers' shops; and it's tested.

Then SMART should be meaningless to you. SMART is unlikely to have any meaningful impact to you whatsoever. What difference does it make if a drive tells you a few days before it dies that it's not feeling good when you are already prepared for it's loss?

That being said, SMART is a valuable tool in that it allows me to schedule downtime to replace a drive about to fail, to schedule RAID rebuilds during off-peak hours instead of during peak times.

I'm sure you have critical, nonstop requirements with your storage systems consisting entirely of IDE drives. After all, don't all mission-critical environments run on IDE?

Are you using SoftRAID? ...

I'm using what's built into OS X. Even though I was a lead architect for RAID systems and sat on the RAB for a number of years (RAID Advisory Board), I'm no believer in RAID. I only use RAID 0 for my personal use and feel that parity-based RAID is the work of the devil. As a technical matter, I've long advocated a far different approach to storage than RAID, which is almost entirely braindead. DROBO *appears* to take approaches that I consider much more interesting, but it's performance is so bad I'd have a hard time considering it. Make DROBO 5x faster and perhaps it will be interesting.

PS: I'm the founder & moderator of The Mac-NT Mailing List: I started it in April 1999 and we have over 1300 subscribers worldwide!

They must not know about SMART and RAID on that list then. Wouldn't "Mac-NT" be a null set?

But, for the average photographer that doesn't want to hire an IT consultant to set up protected storage, it's plenty good.

Don't get me started on Mac vs PC - as a non-techie computer person, I have 25 Macs at the office and home and 3 PC's. Bottom line is for my Macs I've never needed an IT person, for the PC's it's impossible to keep them working without them. I've spent thousands of dollars on PC IT and tech people, zilch on the Macs.

No, it's not. I can sustain 35MB/sec out of a single, 250GB 5400 rpm notebook drive. Fast, wide SCSI has been obsolete since the early '90s.

I used that spec as a benchmark... That's all. The last time I used F&W SCSI was in my Quadra 840AV with the FWB Jackhammer SCSI card, with FWB's driver-level RAID (for a striped volume for my Radius Video Vision Telecast).

I didn't know you worked at IBM... Didn't that come out of Armonk, circa 1995, IIRC?

 

No, it didn't. SMART was a consortium effort. I did, however, work in the industry at the time and was the lead architect on server storage systems for a large systems vendor. I'm quite familiar with SMART and how little it does. SMART is a placebo.

So tell me, do you disconnect the low oil pressure light and gauge in your car, instead relying on the engine seizing up when there's a problem?

Didn't think so.

Monitoring the head flying height is just the same thing: When it gets down to 50%, trouble is 24-48 hours away.

I'm sorry you've missed the point, Dan. SMART is about "saying" they're doing something, not about "doing" something. Drive vendors ARE afraid of SMART false-positives but systems providers are terrified.

Not this provider.

Then SMART should be meaningless to you. SMART is unlikely to have any meaningful impact to you whatsoever. What difference does it make if a drive tells you a few days before it dies that it's not feeling good when you are already prepared for it's loss?

Err, as I said above, scheduling downtime for an off-hours array rebuild so that performance is not impacted?

Although not as bad as it was in the Quack 3 & 4 days, funky things happen to linked prepress files when a server is restored from tape... Especially an NT server with Mac workstations.

I'm sure you have critical, nonstop requirements with your storage systems consisting entirely of IDE drives. After all, don't all mission-critical environments run on IDE?

Did I say one word about IDE here? Yes, having SMART monitoring on IDE desktop PC's & Macs is nice; but I'm talking about servers with U2W SCSI arrays... The biggest one I assembled was back in 1998 on a Netfinity 5500 running NT4/SP5, with sixteen 72 gig 10k RPM drives fed from a dual channel Infortrend PCI controller in a level 3 RAID with one warm and one hot spare.

I'm using what's built into OS X. Even though I was a lead architect for RAID systems and sat on the RAB for a number of years (RAID Advisory Board), I'm no believer in RAID. I only use RAID 0 for my personal use and feel that parity-based RAID is the work of the devil. As a technical matter, I've long advocated a far different approach to storage than RAID, which is almost entirely braindead. DROBO *appears* to take approaches that I consider much more interesting, but it's performance is so bad I'd have a hard time considering it. Make DROBO 5x faster and perhaps it will be interesting.

They must not know about SMART and RAID on that list then. Wouldn't "Mac-NT" be a null set?

You should take SoftRAID out for a spin... It beats the hell out of Apple's P.O.S.

And No, I disagree: RAID is hardly brain-dead... As long as it's implemented properly, including watching out for bus flooding, and write-ahead caching w/out battery backup, especially if the file system lacks transaction journalling.

Cheers!

Dan

PS: Mark Russinovich is a guy I admire...

So tell me, do you disconnect the low oil pressure light and gauge in your car, instead relying on the engine seizing up when there's a problem?

On the cars without servicable engines that I keep spares on the shelf for and that can be exchanged in an hour, I don't consider the oil light to be a critical feature. I don't disconnect the sensor because that would require valueless work.

Monitoring the head flying height is just the same thing: When it gets down to 50%, trouble is 24-48 hours away.

and you uniquely know that all SMART systems do that...

Err, as I said above, scheduling downtime for an off-hours array rebuild so that performance is not impacted?

The fallacy there, Dan, is believing that SMART actually can be relied on for that.

Did I say one word about IDE here? Yes, having SMART monitoring on IDE desktop PC's & Macs is nice; but I'm talking about servers with U2W SCSI arrays...

Yes you did, and I quote:

Also, in doing a cursory glance at the WiebeTech specs, I didn't see any S.M.A.R.T. monitoring support, which is critical to any disk drive beyond a teenager's gaming PC.

Note the reference specifically to an IDE product and the insistence that SMART is critical to "any disk drive". You did not say "nice", you said "critical". IDE SMART, the kind that would exist in the product being discussed, is virtually useless.

You should take SoftRAID out for a spin... It beats the hell out of Apple's P.O.S.

Why would I do that? Apple's P.O.S. provides me all I want.

And No, I disagree: RAID is hardly brain-dead... As long as it's implemented properly, including watching out for bus flooding, and write-ahead caching w/out battery backup, especially if the file system lacks transaction journalling.

None of those things are relevant to why RAID is braindead. RAID is braindead because it implements redundancy and data distribution below the filesystem rather than above it. Architecturally, you never want to do that because you take away virtually all the information you need to make intelligent decisions. RAID is the worst case, last gasp effort you choose when you have no other choice, and choosing RAID when you have access to the filesystem is "braindead". I don't expect you to understand this, Dan, but it doesn't matter either.

PS: Mark Russinovich is a guy I admire...

If you are interested in really learning about RAID, perhaps you might look at what Garth Gibson is doing rather than what Microsoft employees have to say. Garth is an author of the original RAID paper. Hint: he isn't pushing RAID. ;-)

Damn, I didn't know Bryce and Mark sold out to Redmond.

His work discovering the Sony rootkit was quite good...

And I remember the first time I used Mark's NTFSDOS driver circa 1995 on a dual boot NT3.51/Win3.1 (on Novell DOS 7) PC

QUOTE(Dan Schwartz @ Oct 17 2007, 06:19 PM)

PS: Mark Russinovich is a guy I admire...

 

If you are interested in really learning about RAID, perhaps you might look at what Garth Gibson is doing rather than what Microsoft employees have to say.