Re: need for in-place upgrades (was Re: State of

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 14:40, Lamar Owen wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > It is alot but is is not a lot for something like an Insurance company
> > or a bank. Also 100TB is probably non-compressed although 30TB is still
> > large.
>
> Our requirements are such that this figure is our best guess after
> compression. The amount of data prior to compression is much larger,
> and consists of highly compressible astronomical observations in FITS
> format.

Wow, it just occurred to me: if you partition the data correctly,
you won't need to back it *all* up on a daily/weekly/monthly basis.

Once you back up a chunk of compressed images ("Orion, between 2001-
01-01 and 2001-01-31") a few times, no more need to back that data
up.

Thus, you don't need monster archival h/w like some of us do.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net
Jefferson, LA USA

484,246 sq mi are needed for 6 billion people to live, 4 persons
per lot, in lots that are 60'x150'.
That is ~ California, Texas and Missouri.
Alternatively, France, Spain and The United Kingdom.