[CLUE-Tech] Tape Drives - why?

[Richard Mancusi]

EOD = End Of Day
EOM = End Of Month

I will stand on - it depends on the expectation of your environment.
Other notes:

* The HP DAT-72 drives I am using are very quick.
* I know that Murphy's Law would nail me if I put a bunch of backups
  on a couple of hard drives.  It would crash and I would be in big trouble.
* Interesting idea about a two step approach - first to hard drive and
then tape.
* Also interesting is the possibility of using the new Iomega Rev.  We need to
  give that some time yet.

Rich


On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:15:37 -0600, David L. Willson
<dlwillson at thegeek.nu> wrote:
> OK, I'm not certain how this answered my question.  You rotate media a lot.
> I get that.  You want to retain data for a long time.  Got that, too.  You
> want to be able to do restores simply and quickly.  Got it.
> 
> What does tape buy you over file-backups to a central, possibly removable
> hard-drive or six?  Does it cost less?  Is it faster, easier to acccess,
> higher overall capacity, or what?
> 
> And what does "EOB" stand for?  Sorry...
> 
> Just to give a general idea why I'm asking this question:  I'm finding that
> tape costs at least 50% more than IDE/ATA disk space, and is slower, and
> requires special software for backups, and is less reliable in terms of I/O,
> and requires the same special software for restores.  So, my thought is:
> big-ass Linux-based RAID + one hot-pluggable sATA / USB 2.0 / FireWire 800 +
> x discs for said hot-pluggable = fast, cheap, reliable backup system.  Seems
> to beat any tape-based system on all points...  Or am I missing something?
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: clue-tech-admin at clue.denver.co.us
> [mailto:clue-tech-admin at clue.denver.co.us] On Behalf Of Richard Mancusi
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 2:37 PM
> To: clue-tech at clue.denver.co.us
> Subject: Re: [CLUE-Tech] Tape Drives - why?
> 
> This is a very site specific question.  How often are you required to
> restore?
> How quickly are you expected to complete your restore?  How far back is it
> expected that you have retained data onsite and off?
> 
> Offsite storage is very important as an archive - but fairly useless for
> quick recovery unless it is near.
> 
> I am forced to rotate 15 EOD backups AND I rotate a special weekend backup
> offsite for each of my servers.  Call it a bad environment if you wish.
> I call it go with the flow.
> 
> Rich
> 
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:52:35 -0600, David L. Willson <dlwillson at thegeek.nu>
> wrote:
> > OK, I'm no newbie, and I find myself asking the same damn question
> > every time I get into the Backup & Disaster Recovery design process.
> > Why does any business with less than a TB of data to backup use tapes?
> > Why, why, why, when almost any fixed disk media is much cheaper and
> > almost as easy to take offsite?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CLUE-Tech mailing list
> > Post messages to: CLUE-Tech at clue.denver.co.us Unsubscribe or manage
> > your options: http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CLUE-Tech mailing list
> Post messages to: CLUE-Tech at clue.denver.co.us Unsubscribe or manage your
> options: http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CLUE-Tech mailing list
> Post messages to: CLUE-Tech at clue.denver.co.us
> Unsubscribe or manage your options: http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech
>