this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
168 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

1183 readers
338 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

[email protected]
[email protected]


Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Hard drives from the last 20 years are now slowly dying.

all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 42 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Isnt the standard preservation system tape drives? They tested the longevity of different storage solutions ages ago to avoid stuff like this.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

It is. Magnetic tape is still king.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 days ago (1 children)

how did these people not know that hard drives die??? CDs die. DVDs die. the only way to keep your data is to copy it periodically, and this has always been true.

ffs, fucking DNA survives because life keeps copying it all the time.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Optical discs like CDs and DVDs last a very long time if stored properly. It's using them that kills them fast. So in terms of data archival they're actually pretty good. Regardless, u right, make backups of backups and replace the media its stored on every once in a while.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yeah I work for a place that uses discs for archival in addition to tapes and the discs do have specific requirements for storage, like opaque boxes in a temp and humidity controlled room. The discs are also some fancy Japanese brand I've never heard of. Probably best not to pickup a pack of CD-R at the walmart and use those.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

i've had factory printed DVDs die while stored at room temperature in the dark (case). they just developed holes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

Pressed optical disks, yes. Dye-based writable and re-writable do not last very long at all.

Depending on the disc, they can last anywhere from 5 to over 100 years. The over 100 year ones are (were?) marketed as archival, and only CD-R. Do not trust any random writable disc to survive very long.

I tested some backup DVDs from 2012 a couple of months ago and they were completely unreadable.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 days ago

The music industry and failing to understand technology, name a more iconic duo.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I have a crate of old hard drives going back to the late nineties. Am I the only person that migrates the data to new drives regularly? At this point it is a yearly tradition for me to pick up larger drives during the Black Friday / Cyber Monday sales. Why rely on old 4tb drives when you can move them all to fresh 14tb drives?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

NAS is another option instead of relying on random assortment of drives.

But it's most cost-effective to use cold storage like Backblaze if you don't need to access that data and just want to archive it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

What I meant by drives are NAS. I buy the drives on sale spin up a new array, migrate the data, and redirect the mount point.

I use to cold store until I realized that unless I have access to it, it might as well not exist. Now I keep everything live, even backups going back to 1997.

The only data I have "lost" are copies of my old warez CDs from eastern Europe because I have no idea where I have stashed them, and a pack of Zip Disks because I have no functioning Zip Drive.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

Phew, I was imagining a closet of drives. NAS is great.

Cold storage is always controversial as you are storing it on someone else's hardware, but it is by far the most cost-effective option. Just a single month's electricity cost in some places can match years of cold storage.

Using both of course is recommended, as cold storage acts as another backup vector in case your own storage ever gets catastrophic failure due to fire or flooding. 3-2-1 rule and all. But cost is always a factor in people using the best practices.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

I’m the opposite: I migrated 2 4TB drives from my first NAS into the actual one. The drives are going strong and nearing ten years (!) of run time. Two out of eight drives died in this server since 2017. Both were newer. I’m not going to change a single disk before it dies. Most value for money in my opinion.

But I can afford this „risk“: My server has a redundancy of 2 disks. It has a local USB backup, is mirrored to two remote servers in different locations with local backups as well.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

One reason why I love btrfs is the ability to add (and remove) arbitrarily sized drives to the disk array while maintaining multiple redundant copies of my files.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

unRAID can do this with both xfs and btrfs.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

30 year old hard drives failing?

Color me shocked

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Drive failure in the 00s was really common. I lost 2 or 3 separate drives from different mfg over the course of a couple years. Newer drives are better but even in modern nas setups, I planned on losing at least 1 drive per year on a 4 drive nas even fresh out of the box.

Always keep data your care about in at least 3 places and in at least 2 different mediums with one preferably offsite. I like to have one drive in use, one backup that sync's daily, and one that I keep in cold storage unplugged. Then swap the sync drve and cold storage drive every so often.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

So far over a span of maybe 40 years of computing I've only lost two HDDs. A number of 5 1/4 floppies back then but that was typical. Both drives I was able to pull most of the info off to a new drive, so yay for the mechanical drive, where a SSD you're left with either a miracle, or looking for the experts to retrieve something. I'm no power user, so perhaps that's part of the reason, but ever since we got into the giga and tera range of storage my first thought is always...wow, that's a lot to lose at one time.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I mean, don't we all; time erodes us all... that being said how do hard-drives decay, compared to other things like VHS tapes and DVDs?

the only thing that we can do to ensure the integrity of our data archives is to completely rewrite them to newer media with backups every three to five years.

Eh, okey... that's a solution...