The original post: /r/datahoarder by /u/Citrus4176 on 2024-08-04 13:23:46.
I am just entering the world of data storage and am planning out my first NAS and backup solution. During this, the estimations for the amount of storage I will need seems, well, wrong? Below is an example to illustrate:
Say I estimate that all of my working copy of data for my household will occupy up to 4TB of space. I also would like to utilize RAID1 and abide by the 3-2-1 backup rule. From my understanding, the following applies:
- 1x4TB drive for the initial storage of the RAID1 array in my NAS.
- 1x4TB drive for the mirrored storage of the RAID1 array in my NAS.
- 1x4TB drive for the onsite backup of the initial storage (because RAID is not a backup).
- 1x4TB drive for the offsite backup of the initial storage.
So to properly architect my up to 4TB of data, I would be buying 4x4TB = 16TB of drives.
I get that data redundancy is the goal, but this doesn't seem right. Am I improperly estimating the size of backups or how much data there really will be?
Thank you.
Edit: to summarize some of the points commented below:
- Consider whether RAID is needed for basic home storage and the importance of data downtime, as RAID is often a strategy for more enterprise solutions.
- Consider the costs of cloud storage versus physical storage for an offsite backup.
- At minimum, one backup is needed for basic data safety. Past that, the complexity depends on the importance of data.
For my case, I am a basic home user. My most important data is picture, document, and 2FA backup storage, which is only a portion of the overall data. Data uptime is convenient, but I will not be storing critical resources on this device that would freeze my day to day operations. I do not live in an area where the threat of burglary or natural disaster is significant.
Considering this, having a set of two drives (one main storage, one backup, no RAID) or having a set of three drives (two in RAID1 and one backup) may be more reasonable.