Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

12

Tape. Simple like that. Quantum has a SuperSTore system that can handle way more than that and I have seen them for less than your 5000 price point - new. The good thing is that you can pull tapes out for storage so scaling this is going to be quite cost efficient, and tapes last.


6

After a bit more research, it looks like the concept of SHA-256 Tree Hash is something specific to Amazon Glacier, hence the difficulty to find any tool that supports it. However, the Glacier documentation provides sample code to compute the hash, in Java and C#. Both compile into a command-line tool that computes the hash of the file given as an argument. ...


4

Take a look at the contents of /proc/<PID>/io where PID is the process id of whatever is doing the writing to glacier. In particular the values of wchar should indicate how far it's got.


4

First, I would advise avoiding Glacier. It sounds good, until you crunch the costs on actually restoring a large amount of data. This is an unofficial calculator you can use to calculate Glacier storage and retrieval costs, and judge for yourself. Restoring terabytes of data from Glacier is a pretty unattractive prospect. Second, I would advise that for ...


3

No, the file name is part of the archive content, therefore you can't update it.


2

check out Cloud Migrator service by CloudBerry Lab. May become a solution for you.


2

I see some useful comments are already here but will throw in just one comment: I would frankly go with putting your objects into S3 and then simply create a very short "Transition to Glacier" policy, like a few hours or 1 day old. You can access Glacier directly through the API, but the reason I would go this route is that you will still see your objects ...


2

No, S3 lifecycle policies cannot be used to create multiple point in time snapshots of S3. Lifecycle policies can be used to move S3 objects to Glacier automatically , but the originals are no longer accessible in S3 storage without first restoring from Glacier.


2

So what happens if I upload a file/archive, then later, the file changes locally, and the next time I do a backup, how does Glacier deal with this since it can't overwrite the file with a new version? Per the Glacier FAQ: You store data in Amazon Glacier as an archive. Each archive is assigned a unique archive ID that can later be used to retrieve ...


1

I think it depends on your budget. If you can only spend ~ $6k you'll need to build your own NAS probably. I'd look at nas4free and what a server costs you. If you can spend $20k, you probably can fill a server with a bunch of disk and a decent RAID card or software RAID under Linux or whatever. For about $40k you can have a highish end 1U (IBM x3550 M4, 2 ...


1

The "best of both worlds" approach would be the following: Create a S3 bucket for backups Configure a lifecycle rule, so items older than 2 weeks (for example) are automatically transitioned to Glacier class storage. Plan your backups as simple file syncing tasks using S3 for destination. You have plenty of tools to automate this. By doing it this way, ...


1

As others have said, Glacier is more than able to handle 200GB of data. (Frankly, in terms of Big Data 200GB is nothing - I routinely move backups that size every month.) The two things to be aware of are your upstream connection limitations as was mentioned in the comments, and your need to ever get this data back (Glacier is really cheap to store to, but ...


1

No, as the file name usually stored as part of archive description (depends on your client).



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible