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 correctly you will find that writing to tape is faster as you can send multiple data streams to the tape AND the tape drive does the compression. Compression on a VTL is done by the operating system (normally LINUX) which we all know is a slow process and therefore not recommended. Your VTL supplier will also recommend that you do not multistream as this also slows down the process. If you want to use disk to disk backups, then do just that! It is available in version 6.0 and 6.5. 6.5 also has a de-duplication facility which will save you space on the disk (you can choice from 1 Tier to 4 Tier) and the raid group you would like to use AND 6.5 has a replication facility to replicate the disk image off site. If your management insist on VTL, my advice is to get the supplier to do a face off between tape and VTL. Don't be intimidated by them! All VTL vendors use SCSI emulation which has an overhead cost to it (they may deny this but it is fact). They will promise you that offsite storage is simple. Let them demonstrate life. Don't be fooled by their added media server. It all a pain and a lot more work, as well as being costly. Tape will remain cheaper and the tape drive manufacturers are fighting hard to keep tape that why, with larger capacity and faster drives, this despite the fact that they know that tape has beginning to reach the end of its life cycle. If you abandon tape rather go for disk to disk as it is easier faster and safer. If you are not cash critical rather go for Veritas Storage Foundation as the snap shot technology will allow to create a snap shot an any available disk on any array, which is attached to the SAN. It has all the tools included in the product that you will have to purchase from disk array suppliers at an enormous cost. The replication will also guarantee your data arrives at the offsite facility and is recoverable. Oracle backups can be at block level saving an incredible amount of time and backup space. Clem. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Lightner Sent: 21 September 2007 16:34 PM To: Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments? Disk is not cheaper? You've done a cost analysis? Not saying you're wrong and I haven't done an analysis but I'd be surprised if disks didn't actually work out to be cheaper over time: 1) Tapes age/break - We buy on average several hundred tapes a year - support on a disk array for failing disks may or may not be more expensive. 2) Transport/storage - We have to pay for offsite storage and transfer - it seems just putting an array in offsite facility would eliminate the need for transportation (in trucks) cost. Of course there would be cost in the data transfer disk to disk but since everyone seems to have connectivity over the internet it might be possible to do this using a B2B link rather than via dedicated circuits. 3) Labor cost in dealing with mechanical failures of robots. This one is hidden in salary but every time I have to work on a robot it means I can't be working on something else. While disk drives fail it doesn't seem to happen nearly as often as having to fish a tape out of a drive or the tape drive itself having failed. -----Original Message----- From: Justin Piszcz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 10:08 AM To: Jeff Lightner Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments? On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Jeff Lightner wrote: > Yesterday our director said that he doesn't intend to ever upgrade > existing STK L700 because eventually we'll go tapeless as that is what > the industry is doing. The idea being we'd have our disk backup > devices here (e.g. Data Domain) and transfer to offsite storage to > another disk device so as to eliminate the need for ever transporting > tapes. > > It made me wonder if anyone was actually doing the above already or was > planning to do so? > That seems to be the way people are 'thinking' but the bottom line is disk still is not cheaper than LTO-3 tape and there are a lot of advantages to tape; however, convicing management of this is an uphill battle. Justin. ---------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. ---------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu _______________________________________________ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu