NDSA:Columbia University: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
#* SAM automatically replicates data based on defined policies | #* SAM automatically replicates data based on defined policies | ||
#* SAM automatically brings data from SATA storage into higher performance fibre-channel storage | #* SAM automatically brings data from SATA storage into higher performance fibre-channel storage | ||
#What do you think are the key problems or disadvantages your system present? | #What do you think are the key problems or disadvantages your system present? | ||
#* | #* System was a conservative choice, has commercial support, and has met our needs. | ||
#* Oracle acquisition has created some uncertainty regarding hardware. | |||
#What important principles informed your decision about the particular tool or service you chose to use? | #What important principles informed your decision about the particular tool or service you chose to use? | ||
#How frequently do you migrate from one system to another? Further, what is it that prompts you to make these migrations? | #How frequently do you migrate from one system to another? Further, what is it that prompts you to make these migrations? | ||
#* | #* We will migrate at the end of the equipment lifecycle (4-5 years). We haven't decided if we will migrate off of SAM-FS. | ||
# What characteristics of the storage system(s) you use do you feel are particularly well-suited to long-term digital preservation? (High levels of redundancy/resiliency, internal checksumming capabilities, automated tape refresh, etc) | # What characteristics of the storage system(s) you use do you feel are particularly well-suited to long-term digital preservation? (High levels of redundancy/resiliency, internal checksumming capabilities, automated tape refresh, etc) | ||
# What functionality or processes have you developed to augment your storage systems in order to meet preservation goals? (Periodic checksum validation, limited human access or novel use of permissions schemes) | # What functionality or processes have you developed to augment your storage systems in order to meet preservation goals? (Periodic checksum validation, limited human access or novel use of permissions schemes) | ||
# Are there tough requirements for digital preservation, e.g. TRAC certification, that you wish were more readily handled by your storage system? | # Are there tough requirements for digital preservation, e.g. TRAC certification, that you wish were more readily handled by your storage system? |
Revision as of 15:27, 8 June 2011
- What is the particular preservation goal or challenge you need to accomplish? (for example, re-use, public access, internal access, legal mandate, etc.)
- Design & implement coherent & comprehensive preservation program for ensuring survival & continued accessibility of Libraries’ digital content. Develop & budget for long-term digital archiving strategy for content created by the Libraries, whether “born-digital” or converted from analog formats.
- Provide stable, secure storage for large-scale access & long- term preservation
- Support efficient creation & management of administrative, descriptive, structural, preservation & rights metadata
- Support object relationships, actions, behaviors, fine-grained access control policies
- What large scale storage or cloud technologies are you using to meet that challenge? Further, why did you choose these particular technologies?
- Fedora version 3
- SUN SAM-FS platform, four copies, two on disk, two on tape
- 70TB effective storage with 9.6TB tier I disk cache
- Offsite disk storage at NYSERNet Data Center, Syracuse, New York, dedicated 1Gb/s network link to Columbia
- Risk averse - use "tried and true" technologies
- Open to maximize sustainability and flexibility
- Entrance and exit strategy
- Specifically, what kind of materials are you preserving (text, data sets, images, moving images, web pages, etc.)
- text, images, data sets, audio, limited video
- How big is your collection? (In terms of number of objects and storage space required)
- TBD
- What are your performance requirements? Further, why are these your particular requirements?
- System is an "accessible repository" with low latency access to data.
- Decision to build consolidated system based on current size of collection, desire to provide ready access to materials.
- What storage media have you elected to use? (Disk, Tape, etc) Further, why did you choose these particular media?
- Two copies of disk, two copies on tape, with one remote disk copy in Syracuse.
- Two copies on disk support fixity checking.
- Tape copy supports offline and offsite backup.
- What do you think the key advantages of the system you use?
- SAM automatically replicates data based on defined policies
- SAM automatically brings data from SATA storage into higher performance fibre-channel storage
- What do you think are the key problems or disadvantages your system present?
- System was a conservative choice, has commercial support, and has met our needs.
- Oracle acquisition has created some uncertainty regarding hardware.
- What important principles informed your decision about the particular tool or service you chose to use?
- How frequently do you migrate from one system to another? Further, what is it that prompts you to make these migrations?
- We will migrate at the end of the equipment lifecycle (4-5 years). We haven't decided if we will migrate off of SAM-FS.
- What characteristics of the storage system(s) you use do you feel are particularly well-suited to long-term digital preservation? (High levels of redundancy/resiliency, internal checksumming capabilities, automated tape refresh, etc)
- What functionality or processes have you developed to augment your storage systems in order to meet preservation goals? (Periodic checksum validation, limited human access or novel use of permissions schemes)
- Are there tough requirements for digital preservation, e.g. TRAC certification, that you wish were more readily handled by your storage system?