Search this site


Metadata

Articles

Projects

Presentations

RAID is not a backup techology.

I spent some time yesterday making backups of things I care about (code, content here, etc) in two remote places, in case anything should happen. Now two places are copying down data for me every few days. Backups are easy to ignore, but critical when you lose data.

Today, I heard about journalspace going down because it lost data and didn't have backups. While I don't use the service, so it doesn't affect me, the failure they experienced makes for a great case study in false data security and backups. From the front page of journalspace.com:

Here is what happened: the server which held the journalspace data had two large drives in a RAID configuration. As data is written (such as saving an item to the database), it's automatically copied to both drives, as a backup mechanism.

The value of such a setup is that if one drive fails, the server keeps running, using the remaining drive. Since the remaining drive has a copy of the data on the other drive, the data is intact. The administrator simply replaces the drive that's gone bad, and the server is back to operating with two redundant drives.
RAID is not a backup solution. RAID can get you, depending on the configuration, better throughput and/or better data reliability. If you lose a drive in some raid configurations, the system can continue working normally without that drive. Backups should copy data somewhere other than the machine hosting the original data. The page goes on:
So, after nearly six years, journalspace is no more.
After almost 6 years nobody had a cron job that backed up data to somewhere offsite (or a more complex backup system)? Ouch! My condolences to journalspace and its users on the loss.

Losing important data unexpectedly will sting you bad if you don't have appropriate backups. The only thing to do is learn from this mistake and move on, accepting the consequences of the loss.

This isn't the first website I've heard of having to shutdown because they permanently lost data. Learn from their mistakes, keep backups of your stuff!


1 responses to 'RAID is not a backup techology.'

Showing last 1 comments... (Click here to view all comments)

Greg Retkowski wrote at Fri Mar 6 09:28:14 2009...
Another side of the same syndrome of ignoring backups in deference to raid-sets is that many folks don't monitor or have reporting on the health of their raid-sets. A raid-1 set will chug along happily with a dead disk - and nobody could be the wiser if they didn't examine their logs. Then the other disk in the raid-set fails and blammo there goes the data.


Leave a reply

You need javascript enabled to use this form. Anti-spam efforts ongoing. Also, if the comment doesn't show up, it's because the form expired. Go back and copy your comment, reload the form, and resubmit. Apologies if this is a hassle, I'm just playing with antispam methods right now. If this insists on not working, please email me about it.

Name (required)
E-mail (optional, if you want me to be able to email you back)
URL (also optional)
Comment: