4 ms·
having no tape backup is a crime
by weegee 18y ago
having no tape backup is a crime
- jhancock 18y agoI just started using tarsnap. Love it!!! It just works. The default behavior is exactly what I need.
- sireat 18y agoI thought tape backup had died out (good riddance 40MB QIC tapes). This article: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=267 http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=267 from 2 years ago calculated that tape becomes practical when you have more than 10TB to backup, I imagine it is even worse now, that is you need to backup even more data before tape becomes the economy option. Maybe there is some recent advance in tape technology?
- grouchyOldGuy 18y agoTape is a long way from being dead. We have tape libraries directly attached to our SAN and they backup 160 GB per tape. Because of data retention laws (we are a government agency) we need to archive backups for years, which we do off-site in a data vault. For SOHO use though, disk-to-disk backups generally are cheaper and faster, but it's still important to store backups off-site.
- whatusername 18y agoLTO4 holds 1.6TB (or 800GB if the data is already pre-compressed - ie JPG's or MP3's). Write speed of a theoritical 120Mb/sec (about the speed of gigabit ethernet). So unless you're running 10gigE these days - if you try and backup a server to tape through a network connection - the tape speed's probably not the bottleneck. So slightly better than the QIC tapes. I don't think anything compares cost wise (per TB) to a fitted out SL8500 / TS3500 or similar with LTO4.. Also - 10TB isn't that huge these days in terms of a backup environment.. All that being said - For anything under about 2TB/night I would be still be looking at getting away with just using disk (and replicating the backups to offsite).