Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 1 Jul 1998 07:01:42 -0700
From:      "Ron 'The Insane One' Rosson" <insane@oneinsane.net>
To:        freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Strong opinions, anyone?
Message-ID:  <19980701070142.A29116@oneinsane.net>
In-Reply-To: <199807010117.PAA20095@pegasus.com>; from Richard Foulk on Tue, Jun 30, 1998 at 03:17:18PM -1000
References:  <grog@lemis.com> <199807010117.PAA20095@pegasus.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I use the Exabyte 8200 and 8500's and I wouldn't trade them
in for the world. They work great.
Ron

On Tue, Jun 30, 1998 at 03:17:18PM -1000, Richard Foulk wrote:
> } > There have been little glitches along the way.  When they first came
> } > out, a very long time ago, they had a few problems here and there.
> } >
> } > They're quite solid now.
> } 
> } Right.  The newer Exabytes are a whole lot better than the old ones.
> 
> The last six or eight years worth of 8200's have been solid too.
> 
> } In particular, it appears that the drum life has been extended by an
> } order of magnitude.  The 8200 is not a newer Exabyte, and if you buy a
> } refurbished one, you're running the risk of drum failure in the short
> } term.  [...] 
> 
> The newer ones are better.  The 8200's are way cheap and fairly robust,
> especially when compared to their competition in that price/capacity segment.
> 
> } [...]     Note also that the drive firmware hides a lot of the retries.
> 
> Bull.
> 
> The drive hides the retries by default.  It is possible to query the
> drive for the soft error count.  That's were you see the incredible
> redundancy of this design.
> 
> About a decade ago when they got most of the bugs out of the 8200 we
> tried a number of different brands of tape.  The way-cheap junk brands
> would sometimes have hundreds of soft errors in 2 Gigs.  The Sony tapes
> would show no soft errors at all!
> 
> Zero.
> 
> Crummy, worn-out tapes that work poorly even for video will still work
> for data on the Exabyte.  (Not that you'd really want to use them.)
> 
> } > I like being able to buy tapes at the corner drug store if I need to.
> } > Unlike the newer, higher capacity Exabytes the 8200's were designed to
> } > use consumer video tapes.  (The newer ones require `data quality' tapes.)
> } 
> } You can set the new ones to use consumer tapes, too, I think.  [...]
> 
> 
> No you can't.  Exabyte is fairly emphatic about that.  The data quality
> tapes are much smoother and cause much less head wear.
> 
> } [...]   Since
> } the tapes are no cheaper, and the dropout rate is much higher, I can't
> } see any reason to do this.  I strongly recommend buying data grade tapes.
> 
> The video tapes are *way* cheaper.  The good Sony tapes are available from
> various discount stores for around $3.
> 
> } > I've got some eight and 10-year old tapes written on various drives
> } > that are still readable today.  Even readable on the new high-capacity
> } > drives.  Amazing.
> } 
> } That doesn't surprise me.
> } 
> } > No doubt there will soon be some higher capacity drives that are
> } > as reliable and as inexpensive to use (media is part of the cost.)
> } > Just not yet.
> } 
> } What about DDS-2?  You can get up to 7 GB on a 120m tape, and the
> } units cost in the order of $700 new.  DDS-3 will store still more, but
> } they're also more expensive.
> 
> Out of my price range.  Even before you look at media prices.
> 
> } 
> } In general, I'd say that the serious (as opposed to high-end) tape
> } market is dominated by helical scan units based on consumer cartridge
> } formats.  Exabyte is based on 8mm video tape, and DDS is based on DAT
> } (digital audio tape).  In each case, the medium cost is low and the
> } data capacity is between 2 and 14 GB.  Both systems offer data
> } compression, which in my experience (including backing up a lot of
> } gzipped files) gives a storage improvement of about 90%.  DDS drives
> } tend to be cheaper, possibly because of the number of manufacturers
> } out there.  The reliability of *all* helical scan drives used to be
> } barely acceptable, and has since got much better: as a result, I don't
> } recommend buying older helical scan devices.
> } 
> 
> All 8mm drives are format and compression compatible assuming the same
> or greater capacity on the readers side.  This is not the case with DDS.
> A number of incompatibilities exist.
> 
> I know I can trade data with someone else with an 8mm drive.  Chances are
> two 4mm drives cannot.
> 
> And average reliability on DDS is about even with the aging 8200.  DDS
> doesn't have the real estate to provide the redundancy that 8mm does.
> 
> 
> Richard
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------
Ron Rosson              ... and a UNIX user said ...
The InSaNe One                    rm -rf *
insane@oneinsane.net      and all was null and void
--------------------------------------------------------
It's so nice to be insane, nobody asks you to explain.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980701070142.A29116>