There seems to be a consensus that tape is safer. Why? As compared to a Raid 5 or Raid 6. There are many advantages to Raid over tape. Like - no need to keep an expensive drive around for the live of the archive, possibly much longer after it has become obsolete (plus software, operationg system and computer that still runs it). Are there any major issues that makes tape archive superior?
I have a tendency to think not.... but what am I missing?
-George
P.S.
We used AIT with Retrospect for many years, but it has become obsolete a couple of years ago. Now we need to keep tape drives plus Win XP computer around to be able to access it. The tape drives age due to rubber parts such as pinch roller, they have a much shorter live than the tape itself. And then there is risk of tape damage by running it in an aged drive. I'm just sayin - there is a serious down side to yet another tape format.
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "johnrobmoore" <bigfish@...> wrote:
>
> That's the easy access we want. LTO is safer but we have the resources to do both and it's a plus not to have to rely on out of house engineers to retrieve the LTO. I think knowing the differences in speed and easy access it seems reasonable to do both forms of backup. With the LTO already in place why not also make an HD backup? If the HD fails we always have the LTO.
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Terence Curren" <tcurren@> wrote:
> >
> > LTO is definitely safer.
> >
> > As for speed, You can't beat the drive for a simple fix. Have to work on one shot? attach the drive, open the project fix the one shot, if the drive isn't fast enough to play it back, then consolidate the one shot to your media drive and away you go.
> >
> > You can't do that with LTO.
> >
>
No comments:
Post a Comment