>We currently use DLT4000, and are now beginning to see that stretched to
>capacity, even with incrementals.
>
>We are looking at moving up to the next level. I'm interested in the
>feedback of those of you
>who may have also gone through this evolution process, and your
>recommendations for solutions which work with Amanda.
Back in the bad old days, we used ExaByte 8500's. Ick. I then managed
to get everything shifted to DLT4000's.
We recently (a few months) went through the same problem you have and
decided to throw hardware at it by upgrading/adding the key DLT4000's
to DLT7000's. That has turned out to be a more or less acceptable shift.
The less acceptable part is that we don't get as much hardware compression
as we should, and don't know why. But the speed and what extra capacity
we do get is OK.
However, we've now outgrown even these devices (sigh) and I'm madly
working on "multi-tape" (tape overflow). I hope to have it functional
in a couple of weeks (before my end of semester backups have to be done).
For something like backups, I don't like being on the bleeding edge,
hence our lack of interest in DLT8000. Also, I **love** my DLT's for
reliability (although not price), so was heavily in favor of staying
with that technology. It also allows more redundancy since not all of
our configurations were upgraded.
>-- Brian
John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
