And worse yet, you have to run them to the end and then rewind them if
you are going to keep the data for long [the magnetic fields affect
layers near them]. An array of RAID1 disks, which sleep deeply [off]
between uses would probably be affordable, and last MUCH longer.
Just my 2 cents worth-
ya, well, that's what you get for 2 cents.
b-
Mark Hahn wrote:
Not sure if it is important to many people, but tapes take a lot less
electricity than online disks.
do you really care? an active disk is about 15W, inactive 5W
and asleep nearly zero. even assuming idle-but-spinning,
I make that as about $2/year.
tapes are wonderful in every way except one: they're finicky
and difficult to care for properly. for instance, do you have
a humidity and temperature-controlled place to store them?
and have you actually logged the temp/hum for that to see
whether, for instance, it gets warm on weekends?
if I were forced to use tapes, I would insist on making 2+ copies
of everything. note that this clearly hurt's tape's competitiveness
WRT price, size, bandwidth, etc.
I don't see any new tape installations that are not driven by
secondary factors such as big piles of old data already on tape,
or someone wanting to physically move the media into a vault.
(on that topic, I don't buy the idea that tape's less vulnerable
to hacking, either. just because your backup is on disk doesn't
mean that it's online or accessible. similarly, just because
your tape is in a separate cabinet doesn't mean that a sufficiently
motivated badguy could not get the tape put into some drive...)
regards, mark hahn.
(buying many TB of disk this year and no tape)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
