KnightExemplar wrote:My primary storage device in my home is my Nas4Free box (ZFS is a very good filesystem). "File versioning" is kept by the snapshot feature, which allows me to roll back to any previously snapshot time without any wasted space (in effect, its like an incremental backup except its live, online, and always testable)
Archiving/Versioning isn't backup! If your array fails or data is corrupted or overwritten for any reason ("What the hell is going on? That was supposed to be sdc2 not sdd2!"), your house burns down, some virus fucks up your shit, your data is gone - that isn't a backup. If you only take a weekly full backup of that, sure you can snapshot to beginning of time... up until your last backup which can be up to a week ago.
Obviously. But this is a home NAS, not like a critical commercial appliance.
But you're wrong about a lot of that, because of how ZFS works.
Archiving/Versioning isn't backup! If your array fails or data is corrupted or overwritten for any reason ("What the hell is going on? That was supposed to be sdc2 not sdd2!"), your house burns down, some virus fucks up your shit, your data is gone - that isn't a backup.
Corruption is highly unlikely. ZFS is transactional (similar to a journal). Individual files are checksumed and self-healing against sector-level corruption. To protect against entire-drive failures, I've even set up mirroed vdevs across two different hard drives from different manufacturing batches.
See ZFS documentation for details: https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19120-01/op ... index.html
Overwritten isn't going to happen because of ZFS snapshots.
So basically, I'm only going to lose data here if both of my NAS Hard Drives were destroyed in-between my monthly "ZFS-scrub" checks. Even a total single drive failure is protected due to the nature of mirroed vdev ZFS systems. So a fire, flood, or other natural disaster... maybe if I drop my NAS box down the stairs (but I'll do what I can to keep it safe). Bitrot is simply not going to happen because I personally make sure to regularly ZFS-scrub.
Due to ZFS snapshotting, it'd be insufficient for a Windows-level virus to delete everything on the CIFS mount. The first thing I did when I setup my NAS was make a snapshot, then delete everything on my Windows-box over CIFS to simulate a virus attacking my system (like Bitlocker). Guess what? The snapshot restored it all.
So basically, I'm only going to lose data against a FreeBSD / Nas4Free virus. And since my primary machine is Windows, I find it unlikely that a virus is going to be written to cross the OS boundary.
Furthermore, all of the above is my second
layer of defense. A lot of my important day-to-day data is on my Windows machine. (Obviously, anything important is backed up to my NAS: gigabit ethernet means 90MB/s transfers between my primary machine and my NAS box. USING
my backup box is as easy as opening "Drive E" thanks to CIFS). Now my "Drive D" on my Windows 10 box mirrored ReFS (Microsoft's competitor to ZFS). Meaning my "Drive D" is similarly immune to bitrot (due to regular scans by Windows 10), immune to sector-level corruption, and so on and so forth. This isn't protected from Windows Viruses (which is why I made my NAS box).
Bonus points: ReFS automagically will work on any Windows8+ system. Even if my system drive were totally wiped out, it is easy to "harvest" a Windows ReFS drive and automatically set it up to be read on a different system. (subject to Bitlocker of course, if you're the encrypting type. I'm not the encrypting type though)
So anything short of my house getting destroyed (or robbed / looted) means my data is 100% safe. Either on my "Drive D" mirrored storage-space ReFS (~150MB/s)... or on my "Drive E" CiFS-connected Nas4Free ZFS box (~90MB/s). "Drive C" for my 500MB/s SSD has no redundancy. My most important files are of course on all of my drives: C, D, and E.
I can understand that some people are even more
paranoid than I am... or are like commodorejohn here and may have a higher-chance of "house-gets destroyed" (wildfire country does seem like a risk...). So I can understand the need for geo-redundant backups.
But... I'm not convinced that geo-redundant is going to be very beneficial to me. I just don't think that protecting against fire / flood / thieves... against my data... is really worth it.
I wouldn't call the above setup "professional", but its definitely far above-and-beyond the typical computer user. So its basically where I'm comfortable. A good balance of low-maintenance and redundancy. For anyone with a similar setup, RSync.net is basically the only thing that'd offer additional security without negatively affecting my routine.