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