3 ms·
The point was that trusting all your backups to a one-man operation is not particularly wise, though cperciva provided more information. HA and using multiple s
by tdurden 11y ago
The point was that trusting all your backups to a one-man operation is not particularly wise, though cperciva provided more information. HA and using multiple services was not part of the conversation.
- bmir-alum-007 11y agoFault-tolerant backup architectures are cheaper and more reliable than depending on any one service, regardless of due-diligence outcome on them. Any shop of any sensible size/scale would mitigate risks accordingly, or risk losing all their data and going out of business within a few months. The end.
- bigiain 11y agoBeing in a position where your off-site backups becoming unavailable is "not particularly wise" means you got _other_ problems to solve. If my offsite backups vanished (the building they're in burnt down, for example) I'd a) know about it promptly, and b) arrange additional copies and security for my current set of on-site backups. Just the same if as if Colin gets hit by that bus and his service goes down without anyone knowing how to, or caring about, bringing it back up. If Tarsnap is a single point of failure for you, you're doing it wrong.