Re: [Avid-L2] Re: LTO access time?

The problem with hard drives in general is that they are designed to remain
operational - powered up and spinning basically. Long periods of inactivity
are not really within the design spec, so the results are unpredictable.
Usually if you put a drive on the shelf and come back to it a few months (or
a year) later it will work, but it's entirely possible that it won't.

A RAID set is more robust obviously as it can sustain a failure, but unless
you keep the whole RAID online, or can take it offline an keep it all
connected it's somewhat impractical. You can't just take five drives out of
a RAID set and set them on a shelf for later as they will likely need to be
put back in exactly the same configuration (often drive order is important)
and in the case of hardware RAID you usually need to use EXACTLY the same
chipset. A 5-disk Intel RAID is not the same as a 5-disk Adaptec RAID,
etc... So unless you can keep the whole RAID intact (either offline or
online) it's not a great long-term archival solution.

Dylan Reeve
http://dylanreeve.com/

On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:02 PM, george96321 <george96321@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> 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.
> > >
> >
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------------------

Search the offical complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Avid-L2/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Avid-L2/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Avid-L2-digest@yahoogroups.com
Avid-L2-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Avid-L2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/