SEO

In comp.os.linux.misc Sotiris Tsaftaris <stsaft@yahoo.com> wrote:

: To summarize, go with the new and really cheap! VXA-2, go with quantum
: DLT vs160 for double the price, or rely on DLT 8000.

Since your "reliability" requirement comes before your "price"
requirement, I'd have to seriously recommend against the "new and
cheap". I'd never trust my data to any helical drive. The linear drives
were developed specifically for hi-rel use, plus have a very
large and excellent track record.

You might want to consider a removable hard drive instead of tapes.
Faster, probably cheaper, and likely as reliable, plus larger media
so you need less of the media.

Do the math though- if your backups are deep enough and
the tapes cheap enough tape may be cheaper.

Same goes with NAS devices, which do a good job if you don't need
deep backups.


Stan

--
Stan Bischof ("stan" at the below domain)
www.worldbadminton.com

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 23:14:53 +0000 (UTC), nobody@nowhere.com wrote:

>In comp.os.linux.misc Sotiris Tsaftaris <stsaft@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>: To summarize, go with the new and really cheap! VXA-2, go with quantum
>: DLT vs160 for double the price, or rely on DLT 8000.
>
>Since your "reliability" requirement comes before your "price"
>requirement, I'd have to seriously recommend against the "new and
>cheap". I'd never trust my data to any helical drive.

Which does rather show your ignorance of the topic!

> The linear drives
>were developed specifically for hi-rel use, plus have a very
>large and excellent track record.

Ummm.. for some value of "large" and "excellent".

You obviously are unaware that helical recording was invented
specifically for recording stuff where reliability was paramount. We
call it "broadcast"...

(As in what TV stations used for years).

Of course, for any given technology there are *good* implementations
and *bad* ones. However, if *anyone* claims that a given technology
(e.g. helical or linear) is intrinsically unreliable, I'd conclude
that that person is unqualified to offer sound advice.

>You might want to consider a removable hard drive instead of tapes.
>Faster, probably cheaper, and likely as reliable, plus larger media
>so you need less of the media.

Bad advice. Consider failure modes...

[ Snip ]

>Stan

Malc.

In alt.os.linux Malcolm Weir <malc@gelt.org> wrote:

: You obviously are unaware that helical recording was invented
: specifically for recording stuff where reliability was paramount. We
: call it "broadcast"...

In all fairness, the odd bit error or two doesn't matter in analog
video. Not quite so for data :-) Last I looked, even disks intended for
video streaming have a higher error rate than their digital counterparts
and were not recommended for file system use. What a TV broadcaster
calls "reliable" may or may not be what is neeed for a file system
backup.

I would love to find a good backup solution - that is "cheap". I
haven't found one yet. My advice is to more or less ignore price if
your data is very valuable. $1000 sounds like a low end backup to me,
not that I would know. If you are really intent on absolutely reliable
backups and cost is secondary, I suggest you get experts with
substantial experience in to make the decision for you. You might be
surprised at what is involved and how much it will cost both initially
and operationally.

To add some drift, I read in this group some time ago that DVD
recordable of any stripe is no good for backup. The poster didn't say
why. Can someone enlighten me? At first glance it does look fairly
cheap and fast ...


Don Pettengill
Agilent Laboratories

don_pettengill@spamgilent.com wrote:
>
> In alt.os.linux Malcolm Weir <malc@gelt.org> wrote:
>
> : You obviously are unaware that helical recording was invented
> : specifically for recording stuff where reliability was paramount. We
> : call it "broadcast"...
>
> In all fairness, the odd bit error or two doesn't matter in analog
> video. Not quite so for data :-) Last I looked, even disks intended for
> video streaming have a higher error rate than their digital counterparts
> and were not recommended for file system use. What a TV broadcaster
> calls "reliable" may or may not be what is neeed for a file system
> backup.
>
> I would love to find a good backup solution - that is "cheap". I
> haven't found one yet. My advice is to more or less ignore price if
> your data is very valuable. $1000 sounds like a low end backup to me,
> not that I would know.

The *really* low-end stuff is about half that price (Travan-type tape
drives).

[snip]

> To add some drift, I read in this group some time ago that DVD
> recordable of any stripe is no good for backup. The poster didn't say
> why. Can someone enlighten me? At first glance it does look fairly
> cheap and fast ...

Personally, I wouldn't use DVD for backup because of small per-cartridge
capacity. You'll need a lot more DVDs than you would tapes, which means
a lot more cartridge changing (especially significant if you have to do
it manually). I know a lot of others share my view on that, but there
are probably other reasons not to use DVDs.

BTW, which newsgroup are you referring to? (This thread is cross-posted
to four groups.)