On Mar 1, 2011, at 4:13 AM, Bouke <bouke@editb.nl> wrote:
No, it does not make sense.
Of course the drives are the bottleneck, and 100 MB/s is close to 3 times
faster than 35 MB/s.
(but you'll never make it.)
The most imporant reason for not making sense is the comparison.
People use tape backup cause they don't trust drives.
It aint cheaper (Price per MB is about the same for both LTO5 tape as
harddisk, and the tapestreamer is pricy.), it aint faster.
It is about security....
One of my clients uses harddrives to back up her camera originals, on my
advice she does everything double.
And even that turns out not to be good enough, so we're looking into tape
backup ourselves.
(with a harddisk backup as well for normal operation.)
We're trying to train our clients to accept LTO based backups on file based
shoots. Otherwise, at the end of the job they usually have two sets of
LaCie rugged drives provided by the production company with their "OCN," one
that gets shipped to storage and the other in the director's attic
somewhere. It's a bit scary to see how much confidence production has in
such crappy drives.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment