LTO-9 is probably not the best route for "Sneakernet" transfers. When
Tanenbaum uttered that famous quote, tape was still relatively fast (at
least sequentially), as well as it having unparalleled capacity.
Nowadays, if you were to do large-but-fast data transfers, i'd chuck all
the data on a large SAN and put that in the back of the van. Amazon AWS
offer a similar product when moving data from one place to another.
Of course, if you had enough LTO-9 drives to load/unload data all in
parallel, the transfer time would probably be in the same ballpark as
the SAN. But keeping the data synced would be a nightmare, and all those
LTO-9 drives would be horrendously expensive.
Yes, a van full of data hurtling down the highway will still have much
more bandwidth than an internet connection, but nowadays what's in the
back of the van is unlikely to be tape.
Cheers,
Josh Rice
------ Original Message ------
From: "Stefan Skoglund via cctalk" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
To: da...@kdbarto.org; "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic
Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Cc: "Stefan Skoglund" <stefan.skogl...@agj.net>
Sent: Monday, 2 Oct, 2023 At 10:08
Subject: [cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
The main problem with that lorry hurtling down the freeway is
latency.....
I need to move 1 PB ..... how long will it take filling and packing
enough IBM LTO-9 tapes to send 1 PB ?
How long does it takes to fill 1 tape with 18 TB ?
