Hi Steve,
This is the downer on VTL's. You do not get your tape space back
automatically. It is for these reasons I recommend that one never go
VTL's. NetBackup 6.0 and 6.5 allow disk to disk backups; the images are
easily replicated to an offsite facility.
The time for all tape has come and
I agree, disk may not be cheaper BUT one can choose what disk one should
use for backups (Tier1 to Tier 4).
As we have seen in earlier posts there is a fair amount of work to be
done in maintaining VTL tapes which have expired (a salary cost). If
your master and media servers have been setup
And you don't get the space back on a DSU until you expire the image.
So what? I also argue that what Steve is asking for isn't necessary.
(I think he's MAKING it necessary by oversubscribing, but that's not the
VTL's fault.)
Oversubscription aside, once his tapes are expired, the space taken up
Hi Curtis,
You have to delete the tape to get your space returned. This is the real
pain and cost
Clem.
-Original Message-
From: Curtis Preston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:%5bmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 September 2007 11:15 AM
To: Clem Kruger;
The difference with 6.5 is that encryption is included as part of the base
product and does not need to be purchased separately.
Search the archives for pros and cons of software encryption vs hardware
encryption.
.../Ed
--
Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD
Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:[EMAIL
Here's some simple math that may help (complements of ExaGrid's web site).
If you have 1TB of data with a 2% change rate, you'll need to back up 20GB
of daily incrementals. To replicate this to another site in 18 hours
requires 3Mbps of bandwidth. If you have lots of bandwidth or not too
1) Disk ages and breaks too.
2) Transport is cheap. I'd be surprised if I couldn't transport a thousand
tapes for the cost of a terabyte of storage. Bandwidth to move data is
*NOT* cheap. 20GB/day requires 3Mbps of pipe.
3) I spend more time replacing disk drives than I do replacing tapes
But Curtis, a disk drive by itself isn't very useful either - you'll need to
a controller or two.
And don't forget to factor in the price of the de-duplication appliances or
software. Those suckers are *NOT* cheap. An appliance to support 1TB of
compressed data lists out at about $20K. Unless
Don't even get me started on SANs, I have seen the entire loss of an MTI
(now EMC) SAN and with the new Claiiron SANS I have seen entire shelves go
off-line due to bad SPAs etc, IMO not reliable.
Also with disk, I have a question with VTLs, etc, if I am feeding multiple
LTO-3 tape drives using
Curtis - Although I agree with the other responses you have given out
with respect to the tape vs. disk cost I am not sure about your statements
below.
Going back for a second to the cost of tape vs. disk... if you do an analysis
make sure to take all things into account when you
Clem,
You have made a rather curious comment. You don't have to delete the tape to
get the space returned. (My experience is with the NetApp VTL.) There are
settings on the VTL that you can set to allow for how long you keep a virtual
tape in the shadow pool once it has been cloned to
My understanding with Netbackup Pure Disk is that you can manage it like a DSU
but in reality its a server with storage (not a media server) like most other
de-duplication softwares. I was quite excited to see the new functionality,
but when the Symantec rep told me that it pretty much negated
It is interesting to see the points for and against disk / tape backup
technologies play out. A worthwhile discussion.
People have mentioned management/operational/service/infrastructure
costs to justify a switch. Nobody has mentioned risk.
The problem with comparing tape / disk is they are very
13 matches
Mail list logo
