Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:35:23 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: ".VWV." <victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: certance DAT Message-ID: <20050728003523.GA81656@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <000901c59308$5710fe00$98edfea9@workstation> References: <007b01c59251$925c5ca0$98edfea9@workstation> <42E6FCC5.8070309@mac.com> <6.1.0.6.2.20050726211444.18e82a00@cobalt.antimatter.net> <000901c59308$5710fe00$98edfea9@workstation>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Jul 28), .VWV. said: > I have compared some features among different current tape drive > standards. It seems DLT and LTO Ultrium 2 cartridges are more > expensive then DAT 72 and VXA 2 ones. I have not found yet a > criterion useful to choose the most reliable standard. Any suggestion > could be useful. I'll need either to dump or to tar. They are definitely more expensive (as are the drives), but they are also higher capacity and can write a lot faster than DAT. If you have less than 36gb of data to back up at any one time and you don't mind a backup taking 3 hours (if done at night, for example), then DAT may be perfect for you. Once your backups start exceeding your backup window or take more than one tape, you can look at more expensive drives (or an autoloader). An LTO-2 drive can fill a 200gb tape in the same 3 hour period. If you have compressible data, double the tape capacities (to 72gb and 400gb). If you need more than 400gb native on a tape, get an LTO-3 :) Reliability reports are too dependant on local variables (how often is a tape reused, how are they stored, how clean is your server room etc) so I would only trust comparitive reports from people with multiple drive types at one location. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050728003523.GA81656>