Backup disks for photos
With disk being as cheap as it currently is, there’s no reason to not buy some large disks, and create some redundant backup of images (DVDs are getting stale). Of course, my main requirements are writing to these disks via either Linux or Mac OS X.
And therein lies my problem. Should I just attach it to a NAS like the NSLU2? This ensures the filesystem will be ext3 based, and both Linux/OSX will connect to it via Samba. But it also means I need yet another device turned on.
If I plug disks in directly, I have to beware of the ext3 or HFS+ issue. Do you backup to disk? Are you using a NAS or plugging it directly via USB/Firewire? What are you using as a filesystem of choice? (please don’t suggest VFAT for 500GB disks…)
Technorati Tags: photos, large, disk, backup, ext3, hfs+, linux, macosx
Given that there are proprietary system in the equation I’d recommend sticking to NAS like the NSLU2.
i did it like this – ext3 for the disk, share it via samba and nfs. Backup using nfs mount (linux), or copy directly via nfs/samba mount (linux/windows), or backup using rsync (nfs mount) or Unison (ssh).
i don’t plug my disk in and out since a few months after i’ve got the nfs, samba and rsync/unison up on my home server.
OK, have you tried VFAT with terabyte hard drives? More of a thrash’n than the Bosun’d give’m, I reckon. (-:
I’d tend to ext3 them then share them networkily for OS X access. That’s if you can’t get OS X & Linux to agree on an FS, then just use USB2 or something else retail-level to swap between machines.
[…] here to […]
Hm, I would go for ZFS since it’s an Apple. Though it might be an overkill…
A box i have on anyway, RAID1+LVM+XFS shared via the magic of sshfs (and others… but I use sshfs the most).
I actually run f-spot to my main photo store this way.