From owner-freebsd-scsi Sun Sep 7 10:21:26 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA02022 for freebsd-scsi-outgoing; Sun, 7 Sep 1997 10:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA02013 for ; Sun, 7 Sep 1997 10:21:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id TAA22154 for freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG; Sun, 7 Sep 1997 19:21:13 +0200 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.8.7/8.8.5) id SAA13650; Sun, 7 Sep 1997 18:55:37 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <19970907185536.YR13970@uriah.heep.sax.de> Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 18:55:36 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is this (SCSI) tape drive compatible with FreeBSD? References: <19970906102021.YZ35994@uriah.heep.sax.de> X-Mailer: Mutt 0.60_p2-3,5,8-9 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: ; from John Fieber on Sep 7, 1997 11:33:33 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As John Fieber wrote: > I do have an archive viper, but as I think I > mentioned, it isn't working too well anymore and backing up 3gb > of disk is damn tedious with it. :-) I've indeed been backing up my 1.2 GB disk with a TDC36xx (QIC-150 drive). Doing a level-8 restore from 6 tapes (3 x DC6250 + 1 x DC6150 for the level 0, 1 x DC6250 + 1 x DC6150 for the level 8) was indeed a little messy... > What is the scoop on TR-4 drives such as the HP T4000 and Seagate > T8000? I wouldn't trust them much. The SCSI errors i've seen from those Travan tapes were suggesting a very lousy SCSI implementation. They've even omitted SCSI commands that are clearly marked being mandatory by the standard, let alone the usual optional commands most drives do actually implement. > What is it about DAT or 8MM drives of similar capacity > and read/write speed (on the spec sheet at least) that makes them > cost about 50% more? Ask the question the other way round: why are thos Travan tapes that cheap if proven good mechanics still costs an arm and a leg? The only answer i can think of is that this is just throwaway-ware, not designed to survive forever. Today's DAT drives often last only about a year or two when being in daily use. Go figure how long a Travan tape might do it... -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)