so, what's the point of using this stuff and not using RAID powered backup servers?
Does anybody know?
Who's using LTO streamers on /g/?
HP StorageWorks 920 LTO3 streamer reporting in.
>archiving anime and family photos was never this easy
I'm usually making 398GB VeraCrypt containers and putting stuff in it, then burning it into the 400GB RW cartridges and storing it in old ammunition boxes.
>25 years of data retention
>reliable as fuck
A problem would be you'd need a drive greater in size than the one stored inside the tape.
Also you won't be able to make/use backups too quickly because it is very slow to write/read.
If your 5MB file has been corrupted, you will need to make an image of the previous backup of the filesystem from the tape which will take hours, then mount the image, and then finally obtain the 5MB file
God damn I wish I had a couple
>Backuping random internet shit too
I manage Data Domains, HP Storeonces and a shitload of physical tapes reader.
Tapes are used because of their price and because you can store / move them anywhere you want.
I hate Networker, I hate Avamar even more and I hate to wait for the tapes to get loaded.
One of the latest LTO-7 drives costs over $5000 but a single cassette, which can hold up to 16 TBytes, costs less than 20$.
If you are running a data center that requires several PBytes of storage for backups and what not, you'll find that LTO backups are actually quite economic.
x1 4 TBytes HDD = $200
x1 16 TBytes LTO-7 = $20
For a 192TB archive you'd need either:
x12 16 TBytes LTO-7 = $240
+ LTO-7 drive one-time cost = $5000
Total = $5240
x48 4TBytes HDD = $9600.
LTO economic advantage is directly proportional to the quanity of data you need to archive. The more, the better.
Yeah I agree on that, it's great to archive stuff for long periods of time, but it can't replace storage media like external hard drives
A lot of people here seem to think tape drives are a replacement to external hard drives when they are not because of the I/O speeds
compression isn't gauranteed, and you can compress data on hdd's as well
basically, advertising the value after an assumed compression ratio is pure marketing bullshit
good luck putting 15TB of anime on one
Actually it's not unreasonable for most business applications. Your Chinese Cartoons won't compress that well, but text based databases compress extremely well. OSM data compresses really well too. That's why these are targeted for business users.
Tapes are superior for long term offline storage. Unlike hard drives, they don't become more likely to lose data when disconnected, and there are companies that will do secure off site tape storage in secure vaults for you.
Anime will be more valuable than everything you accomplished in a lifetime.
>not having family
>not having friends
>not documenting your life, making pictures, movies
>not having valuable data made by you
>not wanting to secure your entire life in an underground vault
My problems with tapes are:
>expensive drives which can break after extended use
>not economical until you get to over 50tb.
>would likely need more than 1 tape to back everything up, so need some sort of loader system (more $$$$)
Not everyone has the same simpleton needs as you where everything is stored on consumetrard WD Reds in a RAID array on some cheap meme server / gaymen PC
Protip, LTO is used for serious enterprise data warehousing
The company I work for has both. The tapes are in case of either a catastrophic failure like a fire, or in the case of needing to recover something from months ago, like an employee that stored his important mail in the deleted items folder. We enabled a monthly deletion policy and he complained about losing his stuff three months later.
We keep tape backups going back one year.
Actually tapes have some serious advantages when compared to disks, those tapes are not the same tapes you used when you were a kid. I am truly convinced that disks will be obsolete in the next 20 years and tapes will take their place. Tapes are the future.
Well I supposed that if LTO-6 costs around $20-$30 now, LTO-7 should cost probably around the same after release. Even if it were to cost $40 a cartridge that's still quite cheap.
I just got an external LTO4 drive recently. Connected via PCIe SAS controller. I don't have much like some of you data hoarders on here (I have about 800G). But I do care about what I have.
I'm pretty old school and use tar and mt on linux. I use stenc to set the hardware encryption key. I do a full backup of all my aggregated shit once a week. I rotate between two tapes - and take one in to work every Monday to swap - this is my offsite.
>Tapes are the future.
no, tapes are really good for extreme data capacity storage but that comes at performance price, they are too slow to write and read from. Very unlikely we'll ever see them outside backup applications.
Can you imagine having a whole private tracker database stored on a single tape? the MAFIAA trolls will be so fucking butthurt it's gonna be funny. Based Sony.
I'd rather have a 9-track open reel tape drive.
I already have the tape.
8" floppy for scale.
Have you had them go bad/unreadable yet?
Does the tape ever mess up like on a Audio Cassete/VHS?
How long are they "supposed" last?
And are you supposed to store them in a particular setting?
>Nine-track tapes commonly had densities of 800, 1600, and 6250 cpi, giving 22.5MB, 45MB and 175MB respectively on a standard 2,400 feet (730 m) tape.
>22.5MB, 45MB and 175MB
Are they making new tapes? because otherwise that's pretty bad.
Not sure if they still are, but there's probably plenty about. Just gotta find them for not-quite-so-ridiculous prices.
It's not even about practicality, I just enjoy playing with and learning about old tech.
currently using 2TB hard drives to back up my shit and then i unplug everything from it because i don't want it to keep spinning. in other words, my drives are only being used for 2-3 hours once a month to backup everything.
should i just get tapes for this type of backup method?
Aw, that's a shame. I only have the one 8" disk. No drive yet. I'm trying to source one, but I don't want to spend a ton on it, since in practice I won't be able to use it that much.
advantages of tape:
>data written to tape is verified by reading it back using the read heads that are positioned just “behind” the write heads; this enables the drive to write a second copy of any data that fails to verify on its own.
>strong error correction algorithm is used that makes data recovery possible.
>LTO cartridge has no moving parts and so is more durable than a hard drive, uses no electricity itself
>15-30 year life cycle (actually being used repeatedly) of the LTO cartridge ensures a safe storage that is many years past that of a hard drive’s useful life-cycle.
>LTO tapes are extremely cheap. cost for a 6tb tape can cost around ~$20 - $30.
>2014 sony introduced 185tb tapes.
>easy to wipe the drive and keep private info secure be ensuring its lost.
>newest drives can achieve speeds of 400mb a second write. average is 160mb a second.
disadvantages of tape:
>susceptible to strong magnetic fields. pass-by of a bulk eraser will render the cartridge unusable.
>tapes have to be stored in mid 60's to low 70's, no high humidity but also not overally dry.
>no random access
>the reader itself is expensive. more so than the cost of mechanical and ssd's.
>since its tape, to start reading, you have to "rewind" and "fast forward" so reading is "slow"
debatable / neutral views of tape:
>when dealing with many hundreds of terabytes of data that the value of LTO over hard drives is seen. 150TB of data to store. That would require 100 1.5TB external hard drives, at a cost of around $75 each, or $7,500. The same amount of data stored using LTO would incur one drive at about $1,300 and then 100 cartridges at about $25 each, or $2,500, bringing the grand total to $3,800.
there's not that many reviews of LTO-6 on youtube but let me get this straight
the reader/writer is linked to your USB port and you put in the tape and you treat it like an external storage device and thats it?
>LTO7 is not released yet
Then what is this:
It's even cheaper than I thought.
Once I saw a cheap read-only 3,5" SATA drive, but I forgot the brand name, it costed like $300, though I doubt it can read LTO-7 tapes since they were just released. All writers I saw so far were external so yes USB 3.0, eSATA or SAS probably.
>>LTO cartridge has no moving parts and so is more durable than a hard drive, uses no electricity itself
that's stretching it, you could also argue a dvd has no moving parts, therefore is durable
the tape moves, just not on its own, the drive could potentially eat/warp/break the tape, it's not solid-state/non-mechanical
actually it's the opposite, see pic, that's probably because there's a limit at which the rotor can spin inside the drive, so on compressed data which takes less space than uncompressed the reading speed increases.
What kind of stupid fucking question is that? Tapes and RAIDS perform entirely different functions. Nobody is advocating the use of tapes in applications where speed is critical, and when it comes to long-term, safe archival storage, no shitty mechanical solution running long and hard 24 hours a day will come close to the reliability of tapes.
kek honestly, if it could fully cap USB 2.0 I'd be happy with that, I'm streaming stuff from an external HDD in an enclosure connected through USB 2.0 and it works fine even with 1080p high bit rate files.
It's a drive. It hasn't shit the bed yet. It's faster than IDE. Honestly, my bar is set pretty low for my 'storage' drives ever since I got my SSD. I just put whatever needs to load fast on my SSD.
So we're back to your basic home use case that you're incapable of seeing beyond now that you've realized the truth isn't on your side? Guess I shouldn't expect much more from the average narrow-minded Redditor that browses this board nowadays.
If all you want to do is back up a single system for a short term to withstand a single failure, then yes you use exactly that method or a set of drives in RAID 1 or similar.
If you have a bunch of data, very valuable data you want to last for a very long time in a very safe place or be able to cheaply back up very frequently and have the option to revert back to multiple configurations if needed? You don't want to use something so vulnerable as a hard disk to do that.
>External HDs are too expensive
ikr they're utterly useless, you can get a nice 2TB internal HDD for like $60-70 and for another $20-25 you can find a USB 3.0 external enclosure. At least you can use the HDD as you want, internal or portable/external, rather than just external.
it does? no problems for me till now tbqh, I used it like that for about 2 years already and I connected it to the UPS only recently, there were many times when outages happened and the drive stopped during a file transfer too but except the file being incomplete, there were no other problems.
same, in most cases
the seek time is probably a bigger issue, how long would it take to seek to a particular file?
like, it'd be fine for storing lots of large media files if it didn't take too long to seek to any particular one (say more than a few minutes)
that's why he suggested an "internal" hdd + an enclosure
if you're concerned about usb still, then try eSATA (which is literally just sata but with a different connector that is safer to hotplug)
>is it deltaco enclosure?
KEK... it's just piece of plastic actually, paid 20 yurobucks from a local store, the USB 2.0 version of this in pic.
Arent these more ment for Complete failure of a computer or network of computers?
A.K.A. if the building burns down.
>Backup Comp or Network
>Throw in fireproof safe
>Building burns down
>All comp are dead
>Not completely fucked, just mostly fucked
>TFW when the omega of storage is discontinued and never advanced to the same amount of storable data.
Not Optimal for entire drive backups, but better longevity for the critical files you couldn't afford to lose, cheaper and smaller means you can have a matching pair.
oh no I didn't encrypt it yet because I've installed TC only a few months ago, it will probably take ages considering that it's USB 2.0 and almost full so I'll leave that for when it's totally full, I'll make a clone when I get a 4TB HDD and encrypt this 2TB which I'll keep as backup. My only encrypted drive now is the 120GB SSD for OS and installed software so I don't know how the external will react once encrypted.
I almost forgot, I use an automatic defragger (o&o defrag pro), it might be one of the reasons it survived so well till now.
This comparison is shit and you've fallen for the tape marketing BS. An LTO 7 tape is not 16TB and I love how you say 'up to'. With that reasoning my 250GB SSD can hold UP TO a petabyte or more! (Given the file being compressed is all zeroes.)
Anyway, if you redo your comparison with ACTUAL tape capacity and actual LTO 7 tape prices you'll see 192TB is similarly priced for both LTO7 and HDD, and even just loading/unloading 32 individual tapes is a hassle, where each hard drive has it's own read/write hardware and can be left running/accessible 24/7.
Well yes but even if instead of 15TB let's say tapes were limited to 8TB at best, it would still be cheaper in the long run, a 8TB HDD costs from $250 while a LTO-7 tape will cost less than $150 when it debuts mainstream, probably this year and it will be much cheaper the year after as well (see how cheap the LTO-6 is already now after only 3 years), I doubt the HDD prices will drop any more than 10-15% in a year.
I don't think you fully understand my point. Tapes are limited to 6TB, in exactly the same way that 4TB hard drives are limited to 4TB. Both of them can be used with compressed data given your data is actually compressible (so if your archive is compressed video or compressed images you're out of luck for further compression).
Anyway, yeah there's a break even point and yeah tapes have a few advantages. I'm just saying 192TB is probably a low number for breaking even with tape.
I thought that tapes used some sort of different more efficient compression? otherwise why would they say exactly 15 TB and not more or less? there must be some reason why they say that, some compression method that's unique to tape technology or something like that.
>why would they say exactly 15 TB
That's what their shyster marketing department has agreed on.
>some compression method that's unique to tape technology or something like that.
"...if you are going to write pre-compressed data
(for example multimedia data type such as mpg, jpg, mp3, etc.) this ratio will be very poor and in some compression algorithms may cause the written data to tape to be larger than the original data."
that just take common enterprise data as examples
they're not using anything magical, it's the same type of algorithms used in things like 7z/rar/zip/etc (lzma/lz4/lzo/etc)
common enterprise data meaning things like text/office documents, databases, and the like, which tend to be very compressible
>containing all pictures and movies made by my family since 2003
>all pictures and movies made by my family since 2003
>pictures & movies by family since 2003
anon are the children in your family being exploited?
You should get them and yourself some (allot) of help. Its not right!