 |
 |
Without looking into any other issues with Glaicer ()such as privacy, security, etc.), it seems like it could be a good solution for long-term backups of digital preservation. I am not sure I would use it for regular backups of my digital preservation system, but for a long-term off-site storage "insurance policy" it is worth looking into. I can picture using it for bi-monthly or quarterly backups, for instance. In this case it would be something you would never hope to use, but it could be good to have it in case of a major disaster. Edward On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Cary Gordon <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Restoring 3 Tb from Glacier is $370. Add about $90 if you use AWS > Import/Export (you provide the device). > > Hopefully, this is not something that you would do often. > > Cary > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Matt Schultz > <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> Josh, >> >> Totally understand the resource constraints and the price comparison >> up-front. As Roy alluded to earlier, it pays with Glacier to envision what >> your content retrieval scenarios might be, because that $368 up-front could >> very easily balloon in situations where you are needing to restore a >> collection(s) en-masse at a later date. Amazon Glacier as a service makes >> their money on that end. In MetaArchive there is currently no charge for >> collection retrieval for the sake of a restoration. You are also subject >> and powerless over the long-term to Amazon's price hikes with Glacier. >> Because we are a Cooperative, our members collaboratively work together >> annually to determine technology preferences, vendors, pricing, cost >> control, etc. You have a direct seat at the table to help steer the >> solution in your direction. >> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Joshua Welker <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >>> Matt, >>> >>> I appreciate the information. At that price, it looks like MetaArchive >>> would be a better option than most of the other services mentioned in this >>> thread. At this point, I think it is going to come down to a LOCKSS >>> solution such as what MetaArchive provides or Amazon Glacier. We anticipate >>> our digital collection growing to about 3TB in the first two years. With >>> Glacier, that would be $368 per year vs $3,072 per year for MetaArchive and >>> LOCKSS. As much as I would like to support library initiatives like LOCKSS, >>> we are a small institution with a very small budget, and the pricing of >>> Glacier is starting to look too good to pass up. >>> >>> Josh Welker >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >>> Matt Schultz >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 8:49 AM >>> To: [log in to unmask] >>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Digital collection backups >>> >>> Hi Josh, >>> >>> Glad you are looking into LOCKSS as a potential solution for your needs >>> and that you are thinking beyond simple backup solutions for more long-term >>> preservation. Here at MetaArchive Cooperative we make use of LOCKSS to >>> preserve a range of content/collections from our member institutions. >>> >>> The nice thing (I think) about our approach and our use of LOCKSS as an >>> embedded technology is that you as an institution retain full control over >>> your collections in the preservation network and get to play an active and >>> on-going part in their preservation treatment over time. Storage costs in >>> MetaArchive are competitive ($1/GB/year), and with that you get up to 7 >>> geographic replications. MetaArchive is international at this point and so >>> your collections really do achieve some safe distance from any disasters >>> that may hit close to home. >>> >>> I'd be more than happy to talk with you further about your collection >>> needs, why we like LOCKSS, and any interest your institution may have in >>> being part of a collaborative approach to preserving your content above and >>> beyond simple backup. Feel free to contact me directly. >>> >>> Matt Schultz >>> Program Manager >>> Educopia Institute, MetaArchive Cooperative http://www.metaarchive.org >>> [log in to unmask] >>> 616-566-3204 >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Joshua Welker <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> >>> > Hi everyone, >>> > >>> > We are starting a digitization project for some of our special >>> > collections, and we are having a hard time setting up a backup system >>> > that meets the long-term preservation needs of digital archives. The >>> > backup mechanisms currently used by campus IT are short-term full-server >>> backups. >>> > What we are looking for is more granular, file-level backup over the >>> > very long term. Does anyone have any recommendations of software or >>> > some service or technique? We are looking into LOCKSS but haven't dug >>> too deeply yet. >>> > Can anyone who uses LOCKSS tell me a bit of their experiences with it? >>> > >>> > Josh Welker >>> > Electronic/Media Services Librarian >>> > College Liaison >>> > University Libraries >>> > Southwest Baptist University >>> > 417.328.1624 >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Schultz >>> Program Manager >>> Educopia Institute, MetaArchive Cooperative http://www.metaarchive.org >>> [log in to unmask] >>> 616-566-3204 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Schultz >> Program Manager >> Educopia Institute, MetaArchive Cooperative >> http://www.metaarchive.org >> [log in to unmask] >> 616-566-3204 > > > > -- > Cary Gordon > The Cherry Hill Company > http://chillco.com