It seems that a lot of users are, irrationally, opposed to the
use of optical media for long-term archival storage.

What, then, are some alternatives for the general user who does
not command the BIG $BUCKS necessary for enterprise grade solutions.

Tape? Not likely.

Note that magnetic (HDD) or IC NAND (SSD) devices are not to be
considered long-term storage. Consumer SSDs are especially not
long term.

Optical media is still by far the best in terms of cost/benefit
for the general user.

I have hundreds of optical disks that I have produced over the
past years, all with GNU/Linux, and they will last me until the
end of my time.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote:

>It seems that a lot of users are, irrationally, opposed to the
>use of optical media for long-term archival storage.
>
>What, then, are some alternatives for the general user who does
>not command the BIG $BUCKS necessary for enterprise grade solutions.
>
>Tape? Not likely.
>
>Note that magnetic (HDD) or IC NAND (SSD) devices are not to be
>considered long-term storage. Consumer SSDs are especially not
>long term.
>
>Optical media is still by far the best in terms of cost/benefit
>for the general user.
>
>I have hundreds of optical disks that I have produced over the
>past years, all with GNU/Linux, and they will last me until the
>end of my time.

Optical disks are good if you want a handheld copy of something, but
external storage or large USB media is what I'd prefer.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Am Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:40:57 -0400 schrieb Joel:

> Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote:
> Optical disks are good if you want a handheld copy of something, but
> external storage or large USB media is what I'd prefer.
I don't trust in USB drives, since I had amounts of crashes. My DVD-RAMs
are still working.

Regards
Ralf

In comp.os.linux.misc Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote:
> It seems that a lot of users are, irrationally, opposed to the
> use of optical media for long-term archival storage.

Having personally experienced failures of both cd-r and dvd-r media
wherein the recorded media became unreadable in a very short timeframe
(only a few years) even with proper storage it is not at all irrational
to be skeptical of claims of significant lifetimes for optical media
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Alternative to Optical Storage????
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 17:36:29 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <vd6qet$qfrm$1@dont-email.me>
References: <pan$c6999$ff62655a$6baa28da$29b62529@linux.rocks>
Injection-Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 19:36:30 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="dcce1bb59e982dc772b78d51c33e5b9d";
logging-data="868214"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX182Opn3H+bh0FxVSTh7W4Jd"
User-Agent: tin/2.6.1-20211226 ("Convalmore") (Linux/5.15.139 (x86_64))
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TI96qFVL2OjiFjBczBangrROzhk=
Xref: unconfigured comp.os.linux.advocacy:17183 comp.os.linux.misc:2553 alt.os.linux:208

In comp.os.linux.misc Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote:
> It seems that a lot of users are, irrationally, opposed to the
> use of optical media for long-term archival storage.

Having personally experienced failures of both cd-r and dvd-r media
wherein the recorded media became unreadable in a very short timeframe
(only a few years) even with proper storage it is not at all irrational
to be skeptical of claims of significant lifetimes for optical media
(esp. the user recordable type, pressed disks are a different matter).
Existing user recordable optical systems have, so far, had a poor track
record, so any new system has a higher bar to get over before it is
trusted for any long-term archive use.

On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 17:36:29 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

>
> Having personally experienced failures of both cd-r and dvd-r media
> wherein the recorded media became unreadable in a very short timeframe
> (only a few years) even with proper storage it is not at all irrational
> to be skeptical of claims of significant lifetimes for optical media
> (esp. the user recordable type, pressed disks are a different matter).
> Existing user recordable optical systems have, so far, had a poor track
> record, so any new system has a higher bar to get over before it is
> trusted for any long-term archive use.
>

My experience is far different from yours.

I have optical disks that I made in 2008 that are still quite
viable, and an associate of mine burned disks back in the 1990's
that are still readable with no errors. (Both cases using GNU/Linux)

Possibly you had selected the inexpensive, "bargain basement"
brands of cd-r/dvd-r which may have much shorter lives.

Also, are you sure that the "r" designation is not actually "rw"
for re-writable disks? The re-writable variety are known to to
degrade much more rapidly.

I always purchased Taiyo Yuden DVD's which have an excellent
reputation for longevity, but since DVDs have a small capacity
I now only use M-Disc bdr.

I am not a professional archivist but I know that libraries
and other institutions choose optical storage as a primary archival
medium.

Of course, one must always be mindful of future technology.
The strategy is to always copy important data to improved
formats but, so far, with optical media, this is not necessary
yet.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 27/09/2024 in message <vd6q9i$24lio$1@gwaiyur.mb-net.net> Ralf
Schneider wrote:

>Am Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:40:57 -0400 schrieb Joel:
>
>>Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>Optical disks are good if you want a handheld copy of something, but
>>external storage or large USB media is what I'd prefer.
>I don't trust in USB drives, since I had amounts of crashes. My DVD-RAMs
>are still working.

And mine, although finding a device to read them can be a challenge. Sadly
they have gone the way of Betamax.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
If you ever find something you like buy a lifetime supply because they
will stop making it

In comp.os.linux.misc Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 17:36:29 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:
> I always purchased Taiyo Yuden DVD's which have an excellent
> reputation for longevity, but since DVDs have a small capacity
> I now only use M-Disc bdr.

Well most of the concerns with optical media longevity are solved
by M-Discs since they don't have the degrading dye layer, so
whether you believe those concerns are rational or not you've
already chosen the solution to them.

At least provided you don't use the discs enough that they
accumulate scratches like most of the world's DVD-video discs do.

> Of course, one must always be mindful of future technology.
> The strategy is to always copy important data to improved
> formats but, so far, with optical media, this is not necessary
> yet.

If you just wanted to store a little data for distant future
generations, information etched into glass should last longer than
info on plastic M-Discs. You could use a program like Optar to
convert into a printable data representation and then use a glass
etching kit or laser to 'burn' that to a paper-sized pane of glass.

http://ronja.twibright.com/optar/

Of course most likely nobody will ever go to the trouble of reading
it if you do that, but maybe an idea for a novelty glass mug or
something.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On Fri, 27 Sep 2024, Nux Vomica wrote:

> It seems that a lot of users are, irrationally, opposed to the
> use of optical media for long-term archival storage.
>
> What, then, are some alternatives for the general user who does
> not command the BIG $BUCKS necessary for enterprise grade solutions.
>
> Tape? Not likely.
>
> Note that magnetic (HDD) or IC NAND (SSD) devices are not to be
> considered long-term storage. Consumer SSDs are especially not
> long term.
>
> Optical media is still by far the best in terms of cost/benefit
> for the general user.
>
> I have hundreds of optical disks that I have produced over the
> past years, all with GNU/Linux, and they will last me until the
> end of my time.
>

Do you do restore tests regularly? If not, it could be that you might not
have as many backups as you might think. =/

On Fri, 9/27/2024 1:33 PM, Ralf Schneider wrote:
> Am Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:40:57 -0400 schrieb Joel:
>
>> Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote:
>> Optical disks are good if you want a handheld copy of something, but
>> external storage or large USB media is what I'd prefer.
> I don't trust in USB drives, since I had amounts of crashes. My DVD-RAMs
> are still working.
>
> Regards
> Ralf
>

Once you get up to a certain size, they tend to use SSD controllers
inside, then a USB converter connected to that. This can radically
improve the storage characteristic. The SSD controller has static
and dynamic wear leveling. Very few USB sticks have that in a USB
controller (but there are some).

https://www.amazon.ca/Patriot-Supersonic-Prime-Flash-Drive/dp/B095HZ2S8B

In a review:

"Wrapping this up, the Rage Prime is a really well-built drive leaning
on proven components with a Phison PS2251-17 controller, a controller
that's typically designed for portable SSDs."

It seems the controller has SMART (presumably as passthru over USB), and
it has power-on-hours for example.

http://www.cdrlabs.com/reviews/patriot-supersonic-rage-prime-usb32-gen2-flash-drive/packaging-and-physical-features.html

"That being said, there is one issue with the Supersonic Rage Prime and
that is the amount of heat it generates. At idle the drive is warm to
the touch, and when pushed hard the temperature quickly climbs. The
Supersonic Rage Prime's thermal sensor does a great job of keeping things
in check. However, it does so by throttling the drive's read and
write speeds. You have to transfer a lot of data to reach this point,
but it's something you should keep in mind when considering the Supersonic Rage Prime." <=== scourge of flash...
thermal, and the "SLC" cache

Hey kids, always put plastic bodies on overheating things, OK?

I can't find any mention of wear leveling though. Whether it has both
static and dynamic. Comes in three capacities.

https://pics.computerbase.de/9/9/7/3/0-873f87a2f0cf683f/6-640.4e8906e9.jpg

https://pics.computerbase.de/9/9/7/3/0-873f87a2f0cf683f/5-1080.8636258f.jpg

( https://www.computerbase.de/2022-05/patriot-supersonic-rage-prime-test )

*******

This does not mean I am recommending such a device for "backups".
But if you must do something like this, get a nice one.

Not some $10 thing from Walmart that breaks on the sixth write.

Just the expense of the thing, should drive you towards something
more cost-efficient.

Paul

In comp.os.linux.misc Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
> If you just wanted to store a little data for distant future
> generations, information etched into glass should last longer than
> info on plastic M-Discs. You could use a program like Optar to
> convert into a printable data representation and then use a glass
> etching kit or laser to 'burn' that to a paper-sized pane of glass.

Provided, of course, that no one along the eons drops the pane, or
drops something on the pane, shattering it into a million pieces in the
process.

On 9/27/24 12:37 PM, Nux Vomica wrote:
> It seems that a lot of users are, irrationally, opposed to the
> use of optical media for long-term archival storage.
>
> What, then, are some alternatives for the general user who does
> not command the BIG $BUCKS necessary for enterprise grade solutions.
>
> Tape? Not likely.
>
> Note that magnetic (HDD) or IC NAND (SSD) devices are not to be
> considered long-term storage. Consumer SSDs are especially not
> long term.
>
> Optical media is still by far the best in terms of cost/benefit
> for the general user.
>
> I have hundreds of optical disks that I have produced over the
> past years, all with GNU/Linux, and they will last me until the
> end of my time.

Optical still IS the best choice for long-term
storage. Verbatim sells 'archival' disks and
there are always M-Disks which will last until
the plastic literally decomposes.

Mag disks ARE good - but CAN suffer "bit rot",
esp on the higher-capacity/density drives. I'd
writ a 'refresher' utility for those awhile back,
reads and re-writes the sector.

Tape, well, it just SUCKS to use plus the
coating WILL flake off the plastic eventually.

Otherwise, now, there's really NOTHING usable
as ultra-long-term storage. FRAM is good but
it's never been implemented in higher-density
chips. Yer typical e-disks/flash are NOT very
reliable at all.

I've seen experiments with 3-D crystals as storage
media, usually writ with a laser. MIGHT be a way
to fake those using doped glass instead of actual
crystals. However this idea never gained much
traction and remains more a lab curiosity. Holograms
in crystals/glass CAN also work, but at minimum
they're not very efficient.

Note a SERIOUS issue for ANY kind of storage media
however - devices/drivers to READ them. I've got
a few 8-inch floppies - try to find something
to read THEM. Mag drum storage - need MUCH more
luck. Early disk-pack hard drives ??? Hell, it
is getting hard to read 5-1/4 floppies these
days. CD/DVD is beginning to head the same way.
Your M-Disk may be good 500 years from now but
you WON'T find anything to READ it.

IMHO, the best way to preserve data is REPLICATION.
Just keep moving copies to the latest-greatest
media (plus, now, 'cloud'). Don't use compression
or encryption algos likely to EVER become obsolete.
I remember something called "SQZ!" for spreadsheets
long back ... proprietary, and the proprietors
went out of biz. 'Zip', on the other hand, is
likely to survive.

On 27/09/2024 17:37, Nux Vomica wrote:
> It seems that a lot of users are, irrationally, opposed to the
> use of optical media for long-term archival storage.
>
> What, then, are some alternatives for the general user who does
> not command the BIG $BUCKS necessary for enterprise grade solutions.
>
> Tape? Not likely.
>
> Note that magnetic (HDD) or IC NAND (SSD) devices are not to be
> considered long-term storage. Consumer SSDs are especially not
> long term.
>
Why not?

Provided they are kept powered on

> Optical media is still by far the best in terms of cost/benefit
> for the general user.
>
> I have hundreds of optical disks that I have produced over the
> past years, all with GNU/Linux, and they will last me until the
> end of my time.
>
>

--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 00:13:51 +0200, D wrote:

>
> Do you do restore tests regularly? If not, it could be that you might not
> have as many backups as you might think. =/
>

Yes. I will do a random sample on occasion, mostly to satisfy my curiosity.
Never had a problem.

But most of this data is not critical for me. I could live without it
or it could be somewhat easily replaced.

My e-books and music, however, are absolutely essential and must be
preserved. Fortunately, these collections are only a few Tb and I
simply make new copies from time to time. I also keep copies on
USB HDD external drives.

What puzzles me is why hasn't implementing a viable long-term storage
solution become a top priority? Digital information is here to stay,
likely forever, and we need a way to preserve it forever without muss
or fuss.

Unfortunately, consumer-grade optical storage technology is in the
hands of grubbing capitalists. As soon as sales fall by 10% they
will start to leave the market in search of a new fad.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 21:32:07 -0400, Paul wrote:

>
> Once you get up to a certain size, they tend to use SSD controllers
> inside, then a USB converter connected to that. This can radically
> improve the storage characteristic. The SSD controller has static
> and dynamic wear leveling. Very few USB sticks have that in a USB
> controller (but there are some).
>

The fact that wear leveling and trimming are required only indicates
that SSD is an inferior and useless technology.

Superior and stable NAND ICs are available but they are enormously
expensive and the grubbing capitalists that control the consumer market
would never consider them.

This is the reason that I do not use SSDs of any kind and still use
only HDD spinning rust on all my machines.

For long-term storage SSDs are simply unthinkable.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 07:33:41 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>> Consumer SSDs are especially not
>> long term.
>>
> Why not?
>

Because consumer SSDs require wear leveling and trimming which are
both cheap technical gimmicks intended to foist an inferior technology
onto an unsuspecting public.

>
> Provided they are kept powered on
>

Then just keep all your precious data in a RAM disk and never
power down your machine.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On Sat, 9/28/2024 6:56 AM, Nux Vomica wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 21:32:07 -0400, Paul wrote:
>
>>
>> Once you get up to a certain size, they tend to use SSD controllers
>> inside, then a USB converter connected to that. This can radically
>> improve the storage characteristic. The SSD controller has static
>> and dynamic wear leveling. Very few USB sticks have that in a USB
>> controller (but there are some).
>>
>
> The fact that wear leveling and trimming are required only indicates
> that SSD is an inferior and useless technology.
>
> Superior and stable NAND ICs are available but they are enormously
> expensive and the grubbing capitalists that control the consumer market
> would never consider them.
>
> This is the reason that I do not use SSDs of any kind and still use
> only HDD spinning rust on all my machines.
>
> For long-term storage SSDs are simply unthinkable.

Micron had some 32GB SLC flash chips.
But they may have been discontinued before
any number of them shipped. An Amazon seller claimed
to be selling an SLC 32GB flash stick, which is normally
not something you can find. And they mentioned the
part number of the flash, and it really existed.
But today I can't find it any more. SLC would be
good for 100K writes. The more normal TLC or QLC
are a lot lower. You can find tiny (industrial) SLC
flash sticks, but maybe 1GB or 2GB or so. Legacy stuff.
The 32GB one was unusual.

Paul

On 28/09/2024 11:46, Nux Vomica wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 00:13:51 +0200, D wrote:
>
>>
>> Do you do restore tests regularly? If not, it could be that you might not
>> have as many backups as you might think. =/
>>
>
> Yes. I will do a random sample on occasion, mostly to satisfy my curiosity.
> Never had a problem.
>
> But most of this data is not critical for me. I could live without it
> or it could be somewhat easily replaced.
>
> My e-books and music, however, are absolutely essential and must be
> preserved. Fortunately, these collections are only a few Tb and I
> simply make new copies from time to time. I also keep copies on
> USB HDD external drives.
>
> What puzzles me is why hasn't implementing a viable long-term storage
> solution become a top priority? Digital information is here to stay,
> likely forever, and we need a way to preserve it forever without muss
> or fuss.
Because quite simply slightly volatile storage (SSD) is now WAY cheaper
and more bit dense than anything else and is probably at least as good
as a consumer written DVD.

So the solution is permanently powered SSDs existing as multiple copies
in multiple locations. Where is the original Bible backup kept? :-)

Possibly very large laser burned spinning disks can do 4TB, but a set
of say 4 drives to do it in two places is less than $500

And you simply keep replacing them as they fail with whatever is the
latest technology. And copy the data over

>
> Unfortunately, consumer-grade optical storage technology is in the
> hands of grubbing capitalists. As soon as sales fall by 10% they
> will start to leave the market in search of a new fad.
>
No, it simply isn't something anybody is using any more

YOU want a more permanent high capacity than a tape drive., well that is
in fact a hard drive, or a USB SSD or whatever.

DVD simply wont do the capacity,

Nothing last forever, not even runes carved in stone. Where are the
ten commandments now?

--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 28/09/2024 11:56, Nux Vomica wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 21:32:07 -0400, Paul wrote:
>
>>
>> Once you get up to a certain size, they tend to use SSD controllers
>> inside, then a USB converter connected to that. This can radically
>> improve the storage characteristic. The SSD controller has static
>> and dynamic wear leveling. Very few USB sticks have that in a USB
>> controller (but there are some).
>>
>
> The fact that wear leveling and trimming are required only indicates
> that SSD is an inferior and useless technology.
>
What an incredibly fucking STUPID thing to say. I might as well say that
hard drives need 'bad block' management and parity checks which only
indicates that spinning rust is an inferior and useless technology.

There are just as many failure rates - as use of 'smarctl -a' will show
- on spinning rust as on SSD

> Superior and stable NAND ICs are available but they are enormously
> expensive and the grubbing capitalists that control the consumer market
> would never consider them.
>
They would if cunts like you were prepared to pay for them.

> This is the reason that I do not use SSDs of any kind and still use
> only HDD spinning rust on all my machines.
>
> For long-term storage SSDs are simply unthinkable.
>
All mine have *already outlasted* my hard drives
For irregular use, like archival,. the dominant failue rate - block
write errors - is fairly irrelevant.

Other issues like bit leakage have not yet become apparent, because SSDs
are only a decade or two old anyway.

Let me say that I have NEVER successfully retired from tape, and
floppies more than 5 years old are hit and miss.

--
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

On 28/09/2024 12:04, Nux Vomica wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 07:33:41 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>> Consumer SSDs are especially not
>>> long term.
>>>
>> Why not?
>>
>
> Because consumer SSDs require wear leveling and trimming which are
> both cheap technical gimmicks intended to foist an inferior technology
> onto an unsuspecting public.
>
Christ what an ignorant bigot..

I say chaps lets get rid of TCP/IP and Parity RAM because parity checks
are cheap technical gimmicks intended to foist an inferior technology
onto an unsuspecting public.

Or how about fuel injection. Nothing wrong with a carburettor, as long
as you don't fly upside down?

How many 'fixes' have been applied to hard drives?

Checksums. Bad block management, Defragmentaion.

All signs of cheap technical gimmicks intended to foist an inferior
technology onto an unsuspecting public.

>
>>
>> Provided they are kept powered on
>>
>
> Then just keep all your precious data in a RAM disk and never
> power down your machine.
>
That is exactly what an SSD is. Cheap slow and more or less non volatile RAM

--
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early
twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and,
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

Nux Vomica wrote:

>My e-books and music, however, are absolutely essential and must be
>preserved. Fortunately, these collections are only a few Tb and I
>simply make new copies from time to time. I also keep copies on
>USB HDD external drives.

I like to keep several copies of important data. I have two PC's and
each gets a copy. Each PC has an extra data backup drive in it, also.

On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 13:04:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>
> How many 'fixes' have been applied to hard drives?
>
> Checksums. Bad block management, Defragmentaion.
>
> All signs of cheap technical gimmicks intended to foist an inferior
> technology onto an unsuspecting public.
>

True. Consumer-grade technology is inferior in many ways.

But SSDs go way beyond reasonable bounds with their technical
gimmickry.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 28/09/2024 14:24, Nux Vomica wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 13:04:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>
>> How many 'fixes' have been applied to hard drives?
>>
>> Checksums. Bad block management, Defragmentaion.
>>
>> All signs of cheap technical gimmicks intended to foist an inferior
>> technology onto an unsuspecting public.
>>
>
> True. Consumer-grade technology is inferior in many ways.
>
> But SSDs go way beyond reasonable bounds with their technical
> gimmickry.
>
>
No they don't.

Wear levelling is a perfectly respectable way to maximise capacity
usage. No different from eg defragmenting a disk drive minimise seeks

EXT 4 file systems on HD do lots off caching and checksums, designed to
make hard drives more efficient and TRIM is only there because that
caching doesn't play nice with SSD.

--
"I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently.
This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and
all women"

On 27/09/2024 13:26, Nux Vomica wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 17:36:29 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:
>
>>
>> Having personally experienced failures of both cd-r and dvd-r media
>> wherein the recorded media became unreadable in a very short timeframe
>> (only a few years) even with proper storage it is not at all irrational
>> to be skeptical of claims of significant lifetimes for optical media
>> (esp. the user recordable type, pressed disks are a different matter).
>> Existing user recordable optical systems have, so far, had a poor track
>> record, so any new system has a higher bar to get over before it is
>> trusted for any long-term archive use.
>>
>
> My experience is far different from yours.
>
> I have optical disks that I made in 2008 that are still quite
> viable, and an associate of mine burned disks back in the 1990's
> that are still readable with no errors. (Both cases using GNU/Linux)
>
> Possibly you had selected the inexpensive, "bargain basement"
> brands of cd-r/dvd-r which may have much shorter lives.
>
> Also, are you sure that the "r" designation is not actually "rw"
> for re-writable disks? The re-writable variety are known to to
> degrade much more rapidly.
>
> I always purchased Taiyo Yuden DVD's which have an excellent
> reputation for longevity, but since DVDs have a small capacity
> I now only use M-Disc bdr.
>
> I am not a professional archivist but I know that libraries
> and other institutions choose optical storage as a primary archival
> medium.
>
> Of course, one must always be mindful of future technology.
> The strategy is to always copy important data to improved
> formats but, so far, with optical media, this is not necessary
> yet.

+1 for M-Disc BDR. I use the 100GB version.

NONE, really.

If you need long-term, optical is kinda IT.
I'd suggest "M-Disk".

Mag disks can be FAIR - but CAN suffer from
"bit rot" after awhile. There are utilities,
or you can write one, to read and re-write
every so often. Not esp hard to script
something like 'dd' for the purpose. Wrote
a handy friendly util in Lazarus Pascal, but
needed a 'C' helper to deal with large-TB
drives as FPC only *thinks* it has 64-bit
disk functions.

Flash and variants - CRAP.

Magic crystal holograms - CRAP.

Tape, CRAP.

FRAM, good, but very low capacity.

Oh, and VERY important - will there be DEVICES/DRIVERS
to READ your preferred medium even 5 years from now ???
I've got these 8-inch floppies ......

IMHO, your best bet is REPLICATION. Keep moving yer
data to the currently-popular media. Using 'cloud'
can help too - but don't compress/encrypt with
utilities that may not stand the test of time.
Plain-Jane ZIP will last, others ???

On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 21:32:07 -0400, Paul wrote:

> Once you get up to a certain size, they tend to use SSD controllers
> inside, then a USB converter connected to that. This can radically
> improve the storage characteristic. The SSD controller has static and
> dynamic wear leveling. Very few USB sticks have that in a USB controller
> (but there are some).

The thing is, Linux has, included as standard, support for filesystems
(e.g. f2fs, ubifs) that are specifically designed for use on flash
storage, with features like wear-levelling directly built into their
storage-management algorithms.

Consider that SSDs (including USB sticks) incorporate elaborate interface
controllers to pretend to the OS that they are disks and can use
conventional disk-centric filesystems: imagine the overhead that would
simply disappear if you could go direct to the low-level storage and use
one of these purpose-built filesystems!