But first I want to compress each of them or all of them together to minimize file size.
I have heard and read that 7zip is the most effective compression format.
So I decided to compress a .flv file with archive manager selecting 7zip as the format.
The original file size is 95.3 mb and after compressing it to 7zip the file size became 94 mb.
As you can see there is hardly any reduction in file size.
What am I doing wrong here?
Elementary OS (12.04)
Athlon 64X2 5600+ Ram: 2GB
GeForce 6150SE nForce 430
You're not doing anything wrong. FLV files contain video that is already compressed, you can't really compress it any further.
DVD are OK, but the<y need to be stored porpperly. otherwsie i think tape is still good. again it needs to be stored propperly.
DVD have a problem that cracks appear on them. my theory is that they probably appear because of temperature changes. i can't think of any other reason why a DVD that is not moved arround at all or used would get cracks.
it also seems they are of different quality. i have some very old DVD's that work perfectly while some others of another brand that are acting up. so it seems it also depends on their material etc. at the time when they came out (CD and DVD) were hailed as ultimate backup media. their life span was uspposed to be very long. but in practice it should be closer to about 8-10 years i believe.
btw we still have films from super 8 camera form the 70's that are still as good as they were cassets from the 80's that can sitll load a program on spectrum. so i can only wonder what is really wrong with this modern media... i am guessign poor quality control in China is causing the problmes, not their design.
Two words that being with 'R':
1. Redundancy: All backups are vulnerable for one or more reasons. Having backups of backups kept in different environments may not be practical for many people, but, at least, try to find a way to backup the backups of the files whose loss would have a real, i.e., other than emotional, impact. Keeping hardcopy of essential personal and business documentation in a rented deposit box makes a lot of sense.
2. Restorability: Backups are pointless if you don't know how to find and restore what you need. Say you use rsync to do incremental backups every hour to an external drive. You've zapped a photo from 3 months ago that you want to send to grandma. Your backup disk contains a few hundred thousand files with all kinds of arbitrary filenames. How are you gonna find the photo?
(Linux installs are so easy that I don't think it gains me anything to have some sort of Linux system recovery image. Keep a separate /home partition and back it up, back up any edits made in /etc, don't mess with the rest of the root filesystem, and a reinstall to cope with disaster should go smoothly.)
I would go with a HDD and/or
From hereOptical discs
When it comes to optical discs, there is currently
really only one type on the market that can be trusted for long-term storage,
the Verbatim Gold Archival DVD-R. This particular DVD-R has been made
specifically to ensure long-term data stability and has been rated as the most
reliable DVD-R in a thorough long-term stress test by the well regarded German
c't magazine (c't 16/2008, pages 116-123). According to that test, the Verbatim
Gold Archival DVD-R has a minimum durability of 18 years and an average
durability of 32 to 127 years (at 25C, 50% humidity). No other disc came
anywhere close to these values, the second best DVD-R had a minimum durability
of only 5 years.
One very important factor when burning DVDs that often gets
overlooked, is that burn speed plays a very important role with regards to
recording accuracy and reliability. For archival purposes we strongly recommend
that you burn the DVDs at no more than 4x speed.
Since you are storing lots of Video files, the investment in Blu-Ray and/or M-Disc might be worth it.
Most video sites recommend HDDs just due to file sizes. So time wise and storage space wise HDD, Blu-Ray or M-Disc.
I would also add, the quality of the equipment being used to do the copying is very important as well. Don't go cheap.
Professional CD's, DVD's, etc. are PRESSED. Don't be fooled into thinking you will get any burned media to last as long as pressed.
Realistically all you really need is 10-20 years since current storage technology is usually improved every 10 years or so.
slw20: I'd take that marketing spiel with a pinch of salt. I remember "long-term stress tests" showing that 650mb CD-Rs would retain their data for fifty years.
Interesting enough, my earlier CD-Rs from the late 1990s have held up better than those I burnt in the early 2000s. I always suspected the stronger-coloured dye in the old discs would last longer.
Also, simply saying "Buy a hard disk for long-term data storage" is not necessarily good advice either. I've found WD Green hard disks will start getting bad sectors if you put it through the strain of actually doing anything with your data. One day, the dog next door barked and I lost a whole series of The Vicar of Dibley and the Windows bootloader. If you want to buy a hard disk for backup purposes, you need to buy something that's got a bit of quality behind it. You don't need to buy a server hard disk or a RAID box, but just a decent consumer hard disk will be fine.
I try to treat the cause, not the symptom. I avoid the terminal in instructions, unless it's easier or necessary. My instructions will work within the Ubuntu system, instead of breaking or subverting it. Those are the three guarantees to the helpee.
I was just showing the OP the options. As stated, these numbers are also under ideal storage conditions. Do not see how Linuxtech is MARKETING SPIEL.
I'll agree with the older stuff being much higher quality, My PIII from around 2000 still has the same 40GB and 19 GB well used hard drives (WDs) running strong, I wouldn't expect that these days.
I fully expect anyone purchasing an item to check the reviews on said product themselves. As storage, you would think even a midrange HDD would last 10-20 years.