Using Blu-ray M-Disk as backup of last resort
smyck.net
smyck.net
Environmental Allowable Recommended
Factor Storage Storage
Temperature 16 to 32°C 16 to 25°C
(61 to 90°F) (61 to 77°F)
There's also this story [2]:
> I had a room full of servers, many with 16-36 disks per server and had an AC failure. Things turned off as planned, but it hit 115°F [46°C] for a bit. None of the disks died, majority of the tapes did.
[1]: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/storage-deep-archive/1.3.1?topic...
Maximum wet bulb temperature (Only LTO-8 and earlier cartridges) / Maximum Dew Point temperature (LTO-9 and later cartridges), all across the board, allowable / recommended / shipping: 26°C (79°F).
In Florida, we like to refer to 79°F dew points as "Tuesday."
More to the point, the time I want those LTO cartridges to earn their keep is during a disaster scenario. The most likely disaster scenario--other than fire--is hurricane. High temperature and humidity, and no power to run the HVAC to mitigate those. (Unless you have generators with fuel to run for days, and your HVAC, generators, and fuel tanks survived.)
I doubt that the recommended storage conditions for qic tapes were much different from the above; and I've seen a system boot from a qic-120 tape that had been kept in a non-climate controlled ministorage locker in Santa Fe NM for 17 years.
Even with the inflated prices nowadays 3tb 3.5" sata drives are cheaper than 2.5tb LTO-6 tapes.
Personally I don't trust optical. I had some DVD-RW drives and many of them became unreadable after a very short time.
(I don't know what the absolute vs practicate reliability factors are for any of these)
EDIT: Hmmm... https://www.howtogeek.com/the-thousand-year-disc-that-failed...
Tape is amazing, and resilient, but the drives are fragile and expensive.
The sad part is that Panasonic/Sony/Pioneer have pulled out of making drives (I believe Panasonic still make some for their own vertically integrated products), which just leaves Hitachi-LG.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray#Hard-coating_technolog...
If you only need ~50TB it’s probably both cheaper and easier to just buy hard drives, even today, factoring in the cost of the tape drive. Maybe even 100TB. I’m personally backing up ~225TB off-site these days and I still find AWS S3 glacier deep archive to be cheap enough - at current prices I’ve decided the hassle of doing tape again isn’t worth my time unless I’m over 300TB.
If you want to archive up to 100 TB or even 200 TB, the cheapest way to do that is with HDDs, but you must keep in mind that you must use at least duplicate HDDs for everything, preferably stored in different locations, to avoid losing data due to files that become corrupted after a long term storage or due to some accident. Moreover, you must migrate the data to new HDDs periodically, e.g. every 5 years.
If you want to archive several hundred TB of data or more, magnetic tapes become cheaper and they are more reliable than HDDs. You still need to migrate the data, e.g. every 10 years, but much less because of the risk of corruption or mechanical failures, but because the tape format may become obsolete and appropriate tape drives that can read it might no longer be available.
It's been a while since I did enterprise backup, but when I did, most backup software had a 'bootstrap procedure' that you could use even if you were completely destroyed.
First, most enterprise software does not need a license for restorations, only for backups. In a disaster recovery scenario you're unlikely to have the keys.
At end of every backup run/day, an e-mail is sent out with the tapes and offsets that have the indexes and configuration backups. You can send this message to an e-mail address that is separate from corporate e-mail (in case that gets wiped as well); back in the day you could send it to /dev/lp0 (and stick a copy in the box that the offsite tapes are transported in).
So even if your entire infrastructure is wipe (e.g., see NotPetya and Maersk), there's still a starting point for restoring your restore-backup server, and rebuilding up your infrastructure.
Remember: your backups have to be inaccessible to attackers.
Linear Tape Open is remarkably Open for an enterprise product with Open in the name.
Personally, I feel like archival storage of personal digital data is not really solvable. I feel pretty confident about keeping my online storage going while I'm able. After that, there's nothing effective to preserve it when I'm gone. That's not a huge deal for me, I don't expect my heirs to want or need these things... Photobooks with annotations are more likely to last and have some chance of being apprechiated.
I really wish a multi-terabyte optical media solution took off, because that would be the path I’d ultimately take, instead of going with expensive LTO devices and media.
Optical just didn't make sense to me. Overall it was way more expensive, and a lot slower to burn BluRay discs.
The max BluRay disc size is 128GB (which is smaller than a lot of SD cards these days), and the fastest you can write to a BluRay disc is 18MB/s. That's a lot of of swapping discs to burn my many Linux distros.
And those 128GB BluRay discs cost between $30 and $40 each. Used tapes (with a lot of life left in them) on ebay are far less expensive per TB - the lowest I've paid is about $1.40/TB for LTO5 tapes without a case. I typically pay about $4/TB for unused LTO5 tapes with a case on ebay. It's getting a bit more difficult to find those deals, but they come up every now and then.
Tape reigns supreme in cost per megabyte, but the infrastructure costs are astronomical.
SD card is an atrocious archival/backup format as data retention is rated in low single digit years - though I am continuously amazed I can store 100GB or more on something so tiny. I would love a true archival SD card format.
A used LTO5 tape drive cost me $150, an HBA card cost me $30. That's literally the only "infrastructure" I needed to acquire. The tape drive has been running fine for several years. It lives in a tower PC, so I'm not sure what astronomical cost you are talking about. Sure, a new LTO-10 drive costs $20,000+ but I don't need the latest and greatest. I just need cheap, fast storage.
The bigger problem is finding a drive that can read and write them -- the 128gb format support is a bit harder to find. I thought I would be good with my nice Pioneer BDRW drive but it didnt have the support so I had to buy an LG unit. So now my desktop has two BDRWs -- how very 2006!
The LTO5 drive cost me about $150 on ebay, and an HBA card was $30. Yay for datacenter hand-me-downs.
I'm semiseriously considering getting the old LTO3 library from work and putting it to use. Sure, it's "only" 400GB per tape but I have a literal vanload - the racking takes up the same volume as a mid-size Ford Transit - of new and used LTO3 tapes to dispose of too.
A petabyte would only be 800kg or so!
1. The disks bigger than 50GB require a BDXL drive to read, which means spending $300 on a disk player. Which also means rare to find in the future. So if you want larger compatibility use 50GB or smaller M-disk.
2. Japan sells supposedly original MDisk but they look rather black than gold, so they are not the original. Still strength and longevity is quite good on Blu-ray.
3. Storing the disk on materials that degrade like cloth/plastic sleeves may be counterproductive. I got a hard case but it takes effort and is increasingly hard to find.
Still the 50GB play nicely even on old players.
> While the immediate burn quality seems relatively satisfactory, I was still not satisfied as to whether these discs were truly worth their premium over commodity blank media. Looking at the discs, it seemed that the recording layers were likely made of similar materials based on the visual aspect, unlike the obvious difference with DVDs. Also, it seemed that regular recorders were intended to be able to record to the BD-R’s (according to the Verbatim text).
...
> Digging further around the M-disc site, it is noted that their section on longevity testing actually features no data about the BD-R discs at all. Indeed, if there were tests, the reports were not actually featured on the site at all. Further poking around in M-Disc Technology pages shows only references to their DVD products. In fact, it seems their patented “etched in stone” material may only apply to their DVD products.
...
> From my research into the data, it seems likely that the M-Disc BD-R is not substantially different from other quality BD-R discs on the market as they all use inorganic recording compounds (with the exception of BD-R LTH of course). From a visual inspection, the disc appears the same bright chocolate-brown, unlike the obvious distinction with regular dye based DVDs and the M-Disc DVD which was a silver-grey. But my main concern lies in the demonstrated lifetimes of quality BD-Rs which are similar to the M-Disc DVD (to which the M-Disc BD-R is claimed to have also achieved). In essence, it appears that the MKM/Verbatim BD-R DL has already reached the same level of endurance as the M-Disc DVD had claimed without being “special” at all. It is thus, hard to justify paying more for an M-Disc BD-R, and I cannot really recommend it.
The "not really M-Disc" stuff comes from a post somebody made on the "Data Hoarder" Reddit board a few years ago. The discs were changed to enable higher burning speeds which resulted in a slight difference in appearance, but he/she didn't seem to have realized that Blu-Ray M-Discs were never substantially different from BD-Rs and instead assumed that the tweaked discs were more of a scam than the originals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_plates
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-DISC#History
Basically your media only needs to outlive your drives, retrieval mechanisms, software interfaces, and drivers. Or more properly, your backups need to outlive your live system and the need to restore any data from them. Certainly, data may be more precious than a live system, but you also need to concern yourself with format transfers, in terms of software file formats, filesystem formats, and media design/format.
This is not a difficult achievement. The people marketing long-term archival storage media are capitalizing on ignorance of people who have worked with books and photographs, which are "readable" by human senses. Books and photographs are media which can be preserved and fundamentally produced on archival media from the get-go.
Backup media, since it is necessary to have machines read and interpret them, are an entirely different beast, subject to an entire chain of things to preserve. As I've commented before regarding BD-RE XL, my media and the Blu-Ray drive itself outlasted the system it was backing up, and therefore did their job, without any investment or wasting money on M-DISC "Engraved in Stone Tablets" for the gentiles.
I just keep my offsite backup drives in my office drawer. There is a note on them that says they are personal backup and not to be plugged into company equipment. If you have an office this is probably the easiest solution.
If a disaster wipes out my home and my office then there are bigger things to worry about than my data.
Now it's their problem to take care of, ignore, make fun of, or whatever, which was always ultimately going to be the case anyway.
This allows you to back with living your life while you still have one.
There's little point to bothering with predicting what the future will look like after you're dead, and even less point to trying to influence how others will behave on your behalf.
If you really want to have a lasting legacy of documentation, then build it and send it. Send it early, and send it often. Be the most interesting person on Earth today for your group.
Chances are fantastic that nobody will want to volunteer to build it for you after you're gone. But if it's important for you today, then make it easy on them: Send it right now.
...or don't. Really.
Telling some great stories at gatherings while perhaps sharing a couple of visual-reinforcement photos on a phone is enough unless you're a Kennedy or something. A wonderfully-interactive story is worth a thousand photographs. If you've got interesting stuff to share, then it will be interesting to hear, and to interact with, and it will remembered.
For awhile.
The best stories won't be chosen by you, but they'll be retold and will ebb and flow, and will subsequently die in a generation or three at most, but that's OK: You'll be dead, too. Get over it. By generation 4, those kids won't know who Uncle Fred was anyway except for a kind of sleepy myth about the carefully-preserved BD M-Disc archives (whatever those are) that were binned by Aunt Sally two decades prior because even Aunt Sally didn't care anymore, and couldn't be stuffed to keep them.
So keep living, and keep making and sharing new stories. Give people something to remember on their own accord. Don't force it, just do it and share it. Remember: If you were never very interesting to begin with, then they'll just bin whatever you left for them to discover when you're dead.
So be interesting. Live a decent and good life while you have it. Share it; no secrets. If it seems worth sharing after the funeral, then it's worth sharing right now.
(Except! In the odd chance that you are a Kennedy or something, then: Hire biographers. Hire them early, and often. Get that money, and line up the publishing of that stuff while you can still direct the proceeds. This is the path to preserving a legacy in a way that others can see down the road. (It might make it all the way to generation 5! (But it probably won't.)))
So why is it that photos >20 years old just aren't that interesting any more? Because photos need to be augmented by memories, or by stories from others. Once they're just pictures... and once I'm gone... no more interest.
We'd never throw out old physical photo albums. We have a cupboard full of them that my mom left behind. Some of the photos in them are of people we didn't even know, and now won't even know the names of. We keep them because we still have a little bit of connection to them - we knew the people to whom they were significant. But soon they'll just be landfill.
That's how human memory must work. We can't have every generation leave behind hundreds of thousands of pictures, piling up forever. Memories of past generations get purged until 2-3 generations back they're forgotten.
Of course there are exceptions to every rule. An uncle was persuaded to write his memoirs about his childhood on the farm in the middle of the last century. That will still be a good read after he, and those who knew him as a person, are gone. Assuming the books survive - it was a small, private printing only.
Whole lives of collecting sentimental goods all end up going in a giant bin, a whole house cleaned out in less than 2 hours. Photo albums are rarely kept, they just go in with it all and off to the tip usually in a single morning.
What you think is important to you, is basically just trash to your relatives/kids. They will probably have want they want before you are gone.
So my archiving needs are in the decades, not the centuries. If my kids can access them in 20 or 30 years, I will be happy.
I am skeptical of cloud services for such purposes because cloud services require ongoing maintenance: contractually, financially and technically.
The story furthermore must have enough intrinsic drama to engage readers, and fall into the hands of a writer with the skills to turn the raw facts into a biography.
The biographic text provides a structure to hang the photos on, yielding a "photobiography". Search for the term and you'll find examples.
Being even remotely relevant to future generations is quite another.
I had so many of my users ask your question that I wrote this up: https://photostructure.com/guide/how-do-i-safely-store-files...
But a month or two after I initially wrote that, my brother and I found a couple boxes of photos from my parents and grandparents. No notes. No dates. No albums. Just envelopes and envelopes of undated photos.
Taking the time to make an annotated printed photo book, including dates, people and place names, and any other context is going to make those images a lot less irrelevant to future generations, and printed media, stored well, should easily last 50-100 years.
I would not make a bet that you'll be able to procure a bdxl reader in that time period.
Or just keep it attached to your system, so spyware, adware, and the NSA will make free backups for you!
The other thing I did was I ended up collecting HDD's out of old DVR's people were throwing out. Those drives are used for cold storage but not for anything important because they already have tens of thousands of hours on them and in not the best temperature conditions. Again, non have failed yet.
Funnily enough, the only HDD I have failing is a 2.1GB Quantum Fireball from 1997 in my Pentium 1! Really should swap that for an SD card via IDE.
It was a special system, Linux-based, running proprietary software for expensive proprietary hardware.
I apologized profusely. I got them some new hard drives coming right away. I found a forgettable donor drive in the boneyard that had a close-enough footprint for the connector, harvested it with hot air, and put its connector onto one of the broken client drives.
A little bit of dd and some mdadm magic later, and they were back in business with that RAID-1 array like it never happened (other than just a few days of downtime on a system they only used occasionally).
---
A different time, 25 or more years ago now, I somehow broke a 4-pin Molex[2] power connector off of one of my own IDE drives. I don't remember the details, but I do remember that I fixed it by soldering a Y cable power splitter into the holes on the board. This gave me a drive that worked, and that had power pass-through. It was kind of nice to have (and it worked for years and years after that).
Anyway, I guess shit happens sometimes.
---
[1] I wasn't rough with anything; I was just moving wiring out of the way, as one does, to attack the dust bison that had accumulated over the previous decade or more with some canned air.
I somehow broke the connectors of both drives, anyway. I can't explain it and I don't have to, so I guess I won't bother trying. They were fine when I started and they were broken when I finished.
[2]: Those aren't Molex connectors. Everyone calls 'em that, like everyone calls adhesive bandages Band-Aids, but the old drives used a design characterized by the Amphenol Mate-N-Lok connector design which had nothing to do with Molex.
I've been programming for 50 years now. I've had all sorts of failures, including two incidents of my desktop computer burst into flames.
I now set the desktop on a piece of sheet steel. I also only use steel enclosures for them.
I have a Carver amp that runs 24/7 in my office, for the last 40 years. It's now emitting a 60 cycle hum, which I learned is due to decaying capacitors. I guess I need to get a cap kit and fix it.
The problem with archiving data is you always need to be prepared to use the "next big thing" once your preferred method becomes unobtainable.
I currently have :
- Photos in iCloud (Live working copy)
- Backup at home on NAS (updated nightly, snapshots)
- Backup in pCloud (lifetime, mine or theirs, no illusions, hopefully lasts a couple of months if I die unexpectedly)
- Yearly archive on external HDDs, identical copies stored in separate locations, clearly labeled "Photo backup". No encryption, no archiving, just plain APFS formatted drives that can be plugged into a computer and read.
- Yearly archive M-disc blu-ray discs, again, identical copies, stored in separate locations. One disc per year labeled as such, ie. "Photo Backup 2020". The idea being you restore them in chronological order and have a complete set.
And the crazy thing is - we actually watch home movies in a linear format as a consequence. Rather than picking a clip here and a clip there amongst a sea of photos, video can be laid out in a linear timeline and watched without editing.
(I still use a professional Panasonic video camera that shoots AVCHD, which makes this super easy. Because editing video is not something I'm ever likely to have time to do)
I occasionally look at my own, but that's about it.
If an album is well annotated with dates and locations and names and descriptions, it might be fun, but I suspect the number of old photo albums with this kind of effort put in them is rare.
I wonder if there is a better printing technology comparable to analog "prints" (of film). That would actually make more sense (to me) than saving everything on M-Disc.
This is an _additional_ layer of backups, on top of the usual iCloud/whatever things. LTO is certainly not user-friendly, but neither is it especially user-hostile.
And I think I trust tapes far better than any other alternative for long-term storage as they have by far the smallest areal density of information compared to disks (hard or optical).
I have DVD disks that are barely 10 years old and that I can't read anymore. Hard drives also die in storage and/or during transport.
Recently the computer museum helped recover early 1970s unix tapes. It was a big deal.
And let's not exaggerate the complexity of setting up external tape drives, even on Windows/macOS.
Having found a matching Sun Ultra 5 generation drive, I tried to get it to work with a SCSI card, and had .. many many problems. It may be the rubber bands. It may be stiction. it may be ants. It may be me.
I would personally love to de-exaggerate the complexitity: Old hardware is gnarly. I sourced parts, it wasn't working.
And yeah, I started with a ZX-Spectrum with cassette tapes. I was pleasantly surprised by the overall LTO experience.
- A photo album extended with a curated set of photos each year. The real deal!
- NAS at [my] home and blu-ray off site (parents home) for all photos
Updated: added [my] for clarification
On the enterprise scale, the question I think everyone should be asking is: Do they have LTO tapes on a shelf? Fundamentally the same issue (but larger), in terms of needing to ensure it's physically separate, and secure, and tamper evident. =)
Anything in the cloud or connected to your network can be hacked. The backup of last resort must be on a shelf.
Most enterprise gigs I've worked sent them to Iron Mountain or equivalent.
Just use a magnetic hard disk and your data will be fine for many decades if not centuries. You don't need M-Blu Rays (which have very limited capacity anyway). A hard disk is cheap and stores several Terabytes.
You obviously need to store the data in a physically remote place like your shed, car or safe deposit box in case your house burns down.
Never, ever use a SSD if you want your data to be safe for any amount of time. What's worse, SSDs can fail unexpectedly with almost zero chance of data recovery.
A few months ago I needed to pull from an offline backup. The disk, which used CMR and was purchased new from an actual computer supply company (i.e. not Amazon), was burnt in for about 72 hours before it was loaded up with data and shoved in a padded box. Ten years later, the drive was pulled, and there were so many media surface errors that most of the data was unrecoverable. (I haven’t bothered opening the drive to see if there is some obvious sign of what exactly failed.)
In my case the backups were created in multiples using two different brands for exactly this reason, and the second copy was fine. But I wouldn’t say it’s the case a single magnetic disk can take the place of BD.
Mechanical disks are also getting expensive. The disk purchased to replace the failed backup was being sold at three times its original release MSRP. Some of this is due to the AI hysteria but some of it is also that the market is shrinking and becoming K-shaped.
For example, if most files are multiple gigabytes, the drive has 3 million tracks, and 3 thousand of those tracks are ruined: one degraded copy leads to most files being broken, two degraded copies leads to only a single digit number of files being broken, and three degraded copies means >99% odds of recovering everything.
And with the magic of par2 files, a single drive with a couple percent of corrupted tracks can be fully recoverable. Any cold backup I do gets some of those.
Comically untrue, and trivial to verify that it is.
You obviously need to store the data in a physically remote place like your shed, car
Let's make it worse by keeping them someplace with terrible environmentals.
If you're gonna be wrong, don't be just a little wrong...
I also have a binder full of DVD-Rs, of about the same age and containing mostly the same data, that all read perfectly with no issues.
You're asking for trouble if you count on just one backup solution to keep your data safe.
It is absolutely not safe for many decades. If you haven't encountered any drive failures yet — you're lucky.
> A hard disk is cheap and stores several Terabytes
You should check prices again, I wouldn't say cheap considering price bump during the last year (or around so). M-Disks are way less convenient, but pretty reasonable for their cost.
The failure of SSD's you warn of and the way the HDD's fail due to a dead controller aren't that different.
This won't happen with a physically written media like a CD, DVD, or Blu Ray disc. With physical media, you're separating out the media from the reader (the drive). If your disc reader dies or you cant find it, etc, you can go find any another one on ebay even decades from now, very likely.
Doing surgery on an HDD controller PCB to replace a dead controller, while possible, sucks, and may be incredibly difficult if not impossible to source parts for in the future.
I don't expect anything with moving parts to last 1/10th that long, but MTBF is MTBF. :)
[1]: https://www.seagate.com/files/www-content/datasheets/pdfs/ex...
This recent study I found [1] shows almost 4% HDD loss after only 2.5 years for consumer hardware, enterprise products being a bit better.
[1] https://research.cs.wisc.edu/adsl/Publications/latent-sigmet...
---
Suppose I hire a scribe named Gunther, and this scribe named Gunther confidently states that he has a lifespan of a mean ~quarter-millennium. He can't really explain how he does it in simple terms, but Gunther states that he is an expert at transcribing and storing and retrieving records with great longevity and accuracy.
Gunther suggests that he can keep doing this for as long as he's around, give or take.
Two hundred years ago, I told Gunther to file a transcription of a a 512-byte thing and to store it where he can find it upon my command for as long as he may live. Gunther did so with glee, and stored it however he did.
Today, 200 years hence: I ask Gunther to retrieve that 512-byte thing and email it to me. But Gunther cannot do so; for his perspective, the 512-byte record is gone. Perhaps he can't see it well-enough anymore, or perhaps it has been destroyed, or perhaps it was stolen or maybe even something else. Maybe he can see the record, but the contents just don't make sense to Gunther anymore after all this time.
Gunther is very sorry about this, and I still don't have my 512-byte record retrieved.
Whatever it was: Only Gunther really knew where that 512-byte block of information was stored, and Gunther was the only soul that had access to the area where it was stored, and Gunther is still very much alive to retrieve it. But Gunther still fails to retrieve it. He went to exactly what he knew must be the right spot, and he just couldn't get it done.
Gunther is a failure in this matter. It may have been a stupendous task, but Gunther failed it anyway.
I place a mark on his failure record, and Gunther knows that he earned that mark of failure.
This marked failure will affect Gunther's Mean Time Between Failures, or MTBF.
---
If Gunther is a hard drive, then: The hard drive now has a recorded failure. It may have taken 200+ years, but failure is failure.
(And in a pure and just world, we can chalk that failure up on the MTBF charts for everyone to see exactly what that MTBF has now become for any given Gunther/hard drive.
Except: We also need to know the success rates in order to tabulate that MTBF. Failure alone doesn't get us there.
And in hard drives, nobody publishes good data about success rates. We don't talk about the drives that live forever; they usually get disused and eventually recycled before they properly fail.
IE, we broadly only discuss failure rates (including outliers), and not success rates (we generally send those most-surviving drives off to make new cars out of in some foundry somewhere; we don't wait for them to fail).
Without both measures, a true in-the-field MTBF cannot be established. A percentage-of-death rate without a percentage-of-ultimate-life rate doesn't mean anything in terms of MTBF.
(Which brings us back to those randomly-selected EXOS drives from Seagate, with a rating of 2.5 million hours MTBF.))
That's a lot of work to avoid accepting your previous comment was incorrect.
I then presented practical examples of how I understand failures to behave in data storage devices, such as Gunther.
Can you answer the initial question?
Or are you just here to brow-beat your version of what you believe to be correct -- without the benefit of citation, or logic, or reason?
(Remember, kind HN user: I did not dismiss you at all. I engaged on all cylinders. And I'm here to learn. If you have something to teach, then: Please teach it. If not, then: Please disengage.
I'm not interested in logical fallacies, though, like appeals to authority: Those non-constructs waste our time.)
You just need to make sure you let the electronics acclimatize before powering them on. I always let my external HD acclimatize for 24 hours before powering it on after I grab it from my shed where it's been lying for months in freezing conditions. No problem whatsoever.
It is a convention that optical discs are discs, and floppy disks or hard disks are disks. It is not a hard-and-fast spelling rule, but since there is indeed a set of official standards for Compact Disc and Digital Versatile* Disc, you can be sure that any conforming optical disc won't be spelled with a "k".
* Were you surprised that the "V" doesn't stand for "Video"?
I have so many photos of vacations and people who I've buried over the years, that I don't want to lose.
So I was thinking about using Blu-ray M-Disks as well, these last couple of months.