Ian, you seem to be becoming less humorless by the minute. :-D My point was, it's not appropriate to make blanket statements like DON'T USE TAPE FOR BACKUP which may confuse the less-informed, when some of the other practices one espouses aren't exactly a paragon of best practice.
Of course, for backup, the answer lies somewhere in between: Hierarchical Storage Management. Use disk for the online backup, tape library for the near-online, ordinary tapes taken offsite for the off-line backup. I would understand that's why certain people on the list would take exception to your statement. Because it purports to be the end-all: DON'T USE TAPE, end of story. And you justify this with unsubstantiated tales of tape drive inefficiency, when, as Andre rightly points out, lots and lots of really big companies use tape and love it. Like the story of "export" for Oracle backup, no story is the entire story. To the OP: I would stick with disk for near-line backup. That's what everybody does anyway. I'd use tape for the historical data (say put Papa and Sonny Boy on disk, but put Grampa on tape). Let's not get into hair-splitting over "archiving" vs "backup" -- an archive is just a point-in-time backup. On 8/2/07, ian sison (mailing list) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: .. > Very funny. The analogy is indeed the same. Apples are indeed the > same as oranges. _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
