ah good.  then we are agreeing.  strike the whole disagree with ed portion
of my email.

also i like the pelican idea too.  it reminds me of dick cheney in an
undisclosed location.

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Edward M. Corrado <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Hi Roslyn,
>
> I probably wasn't clear.... I didn't mean to say don't use cloud storage if
> you think it is a good solution, in many cases it could be. I meant that if
> you really want to preserve your data you need to do more than put it in the
> cloud (or for that matter on a local storage device). It is not a panacea.
> Just like if you were housing it locally you need to make sure you have
> redundant copies.
>
> Edward
>
>
> Rosalyn Metz wrote:
>
>> I have to agree with Ed.  You should have a good policy in place for
>> backing
>> up your data.  Just throwing it on a server isn't a policy.
>>
>> At the same time I would have to disagree with Ed.  You should look at S3
>> as
>> if it was your own server.  What is the guarantee that you supply to your
>> users with your own server.  The snap server we use here (instead of S3)
>> is
>> the back up to a back up system already in place.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Edward M. Corrado <[log in to unmask]
>> >wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Rosalyn's post  made me think of one more thing.... if you are looking
>>> into
>>> outside entities (such as we are), what are the terms of service and what
>>> guarantee do they offer they won't lose your data? I believe that A3 does
>>> not offer any guarantee, so if you go with them, you probably want to
>>> have
>>> some other form of storage as well. Even if they offered a guarantee,
>>> what
>>> good is it once they loose your documents you were trying to preserve?
>>>
>>> Edward Corrado
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rosalyn Metz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Edward,
>>>>
>>>> Might I suggest you look into cloud computing services if you're looking
>>>> at
>>>> different options. (I know you're all shocked I suggested it).  If our
>>>> budget weren't so abysmal (and going to get worse) we would be using it
>>>> right now rather than the snap server we purchased with leftover funds.
>>>>  The
>>>> benefits of using the cloud is of course the elasticity it offers you.
>>>>  The
>>>> negative is that you have to pay to put your files into the cloud and
>>>> then
>>>> pay again to take them out (and since we've already been slashed 30% and
>>>> are
>>>> guaranteed another slash...that idea was shot down).
>>>>
>>>> Of course the major player out there is Amazon S3.  The problem is that
>>>> you
>>>> can't use S3 via Amazon's Web Management Console.  But there is a
>>>> company
>>>> called RightScale (http://www.rightscale.com/index.php) which has a web
>>>> management console that allows you to upload files quickly and easily
>>>> without having to write scripts and what not.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, just my two cents.
>>>>
>>>> Rosalyn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Edward Iglesias
>>>> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> As I was trying to figure out what to do with half a terabyte of
>>>>> archival TIFFS it occurred to me that perhaps someone else had this
>>>>> problem.  We are starting to produce massive amounts of digital
>>>>> objects (videos, archival TIFFS, audio interviews).  Up until now we
>>>>> have been dealing with ways to display them to the public.  Now we are
>>>>> starting to look at "dark archives" like OCLC's digital archive
>>>>> product.  I would welcome any suggestions from those of you who have
>>>>> dealt with this on an archival level.  It's one thing to stick the
>>>>> stuff up on a server, but then what?  Our CIO suggested storage
>>>>> appliances like this one
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.drobo.com/products/index.php
>>>>>
>>>>> but I am wary of the proprietary RAID system.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>> Edward Iglesias
>>>>> Systems Librarian
>>>>> Central Connecticut State University
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>