On Wed, March 10, 2010 14:47, Svein Skogen wrote: > On 10.03.2010 18:18, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: >> The advantage of the tapes is an official support channel, and much >> greater >> archive life. The advantage of the removable disks is that you need no >> special software to do a restore, and you could just as easily restore a >> single file or the whole filesystem. > > There is another advantage as well, but I'll let you try that one for > yourself. > > - -Make two backups. One to a HDD, one to a modern LTO or similar tape. > - -Walk up the stairs to the first floor. > - -Open the window. > - -Drop both backups onto the ground. > - -Try to restore both backups... > > See any differences in reliability for disasters here? > > ;)
Slightly OT, but it should also be noted that you need to generally need to put disks in front of most modern tape systems (LTO-3, -4, upcoming -5). It's a matter of tape being "too fast": LTO-4 = 120 MB/s; LTO-5 = 140 MB/s; LTO-6 = planned 270 MB/s. (Speeds are native, not compressed.) It's very challenging to stream directly from a client to a tape drive over the network. Most modern backup architectures go to disk first (e.g. VTL), and then clone to tape for longer term storage (or off site) needs. The UER are also better for tapes than disks (though this is mitigated with ZFS' checksums). _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
