>14TB/ea @ $245
Does anyone here use tape drives?
Tape drives are for large organizations with data that is worthwhile (or legally required) to archive, so... no, no one here uses tape drives.
>>45613416
Thats $17.5 /TB
About 1/2-1/3 price of regular hard drives.
Not too bad, but I'd expected bit more better from tape drives.
How's the read/write rates?
I would consider one for server backups in the future.
>>45613474
True, but theres a lot of effort that goes in to making less shitty tapes capable of such storage... Also i think tapes are more reliable... (I wish they had some consumer grade shit, like 1-2TB Tapes for the home user, theres a lot of shit i would back up that i'd feel safer if it was on a tape for whatever reason
>>45613416
I want one so I can store my mp3s and not get rotovelocity deterioration.
>>45613474
It wont be 1/2 the cost of hard drives for long. Seagate is shipping 8TB drives for $260 which will probably drive the cost of other drives down.
>>45613555
that's not the only benefit. tapes can survive for decades. HDDs break down after 2-6 years.
>>45613501
>$1000+ for the drive
Yeah nevermind, not worth it.
>>45613416
Could you use one of these like you would an external hard drive? I'm assuming access times would me much slower.
Where does one buy these?
>>45613416
With the cost of drives how much storage before you break $40/tb?
>>45613555
>Seagate is shipping 8TB drives for $260
Are you fucking serious? That's a 4TB for $130, that's $30 a terabyte. How in the fuck did they get so cheap so fast?
>>45613613
No. You'd have to seek back to the beginning of the tape each time you wanted to read the MFT. You'd probably fuck the tape up after a day or two of constantly playing and rewinding it.
>>45613613
Unless you plan on using it for full-disk/streaming backup, your access times are going to be several orders of magnitude longer than harddrives.
>>45613579
>HDDs break down after 2-6 years.
what?
>>45613555
>Seashit
>>45613555
>8TB
>$260
How?
>Shingled Magnetic Recording
It's happened. It's been years, but it's finally happened. Say hello to cheap 20TB drives soon.
>>45613555
IIRC that's an archival drive. Who knows what that actually means.
I wish I could get LTO tape into my backup scheme (I'm a filmfag, and I'd like to have ~15 TB backed up at any given time) but with the cost of the tape deck, it would be years before I came out ahead of HDD.
HDD doesn't have the shelf life of tape, but net cost is cheaper. Just means a bit of a hassle spinning the whole archive up periodically to make sure it's still good.
If I could afford (or even rent) a tape deck, I'd use it as a doomsday/offsite backup all the time. I have a lot of stuff that I don't need to access very often, but I can't just delete it.
Yeah, i use tape drives.
>>45613660
>Who knows what that actually means.
They call it that because of the shingled recording. It's less efficient than what current drives use, but you can store more. If you're just using it for storage it doesn't matter because the performance hit only happens during rewrites.
Last time I looked LTO drives were stupid expensive.
>>45613416
A lot of customer sites I service with local data use them. When I've had to do major disaster recovery, I was amazed at the transfer speeds.
On the downside, they're expensive as compared to RAID.
>>45613681
Makes sense. Seems perfect for my purposes.
I could see using it for a shelf archive, but I'd want a duplicate too (in addition to the working storage I have on board already). And parity data just for laughs.
>>45613771
>compared to RAID
Their purpose is different to that of RAID.
The speed of backups when doing disaster recovery is critical.
>>45613655
>as I post this there's a Seagate 2TB drive clicking away at me
>>45613863
Nobody cares about your misfortune. I've had great experiences with Seagate and the drives are very cheap.
>>45613808
I don't disagree with you. I'm just the software guy, though. I don't have a say in this shit. Backups that can be archived and taken off-site are obviously better.
I'm just saying some 3rd party IT folks have opted to just RAID 1 any critical data drives to protect against the more common causes of data loss/downtime. These are usually small office sites with limited budgets.
>>45613898
So you work at Seashit by any chance?
>>45613898
>>45613863
All that fucking matters is the warranty.
>>45614225
If your data is worthless, use Seagate™
>>45614313
I always RAID 1 my drives from point blank, no matter the manufacturer.
After a good 5x burn in, usually, just to be sure I won't have a simultaneous failure.
>>45613474
They read/write at ridiculous speeds.
Just seek time is horrid.
(LHC uses them because of the massive bytes/s they get)
I have terabytes of video that I need to archive. I wish I could afford this shit, or even a couple harddrives for RAID
>>45613416
great for archiving
good luck pulling content though
