Tell me, can LTO-4 tapes hold 800GB or 1.6TBs of actual data?
Everywhere says "1.6TB with 2:1 compression" so what does that actually mean?
How much usable space is that?
It's 1.6TB and the data is automatically compressed due to the format, I'd assume.
Keep in mind tape storage is used because it's a tape, not because it's a good way to access your data. Tape is fuckin indestructible, but it's shit for anything but long-term archival.
>>51595157
I'VE BEEN SERIOUSLY CONSIDERING AN LTO5 DRIVE
YOU DROP BIG DOSH ON THE DRIVE BUT THE TAPES ARE DIRT CHEAP, 3TB COMPRESSED PER LTO5 TAPE
>>51595236
This.
It doesn't replace a RAID. It just makes it so you won't need 2 RAIDs.
>>51596095
ITS PERFECT FOR WRITE ONCE READ MANY, SEQUENTIALLY READING OFF A BLURAY REMUX WORKS GR8
SEEK TIMES ARE FAST FOR LATE GENERATION LTO, THROUGHPUT FOR COPYING IS HUGE, MORE THAN MOST HDDS CAN DELIVER
GENERALLY YOU'LL NEED A SAS CARD TO CONNECT IT, THEYRE DESIGNED FOR SERVERS
>>51596264
You probably couldn't directly share files you have on a tape array, due to needing software to get the data off it. You're gonna want a RAID or a cache drive if you're using DC++ or seeding torrents.
>>51595236
Glorious way of archiving OS images or NAS snapshots etc though. I've got a 480GB SSD for OS, and once a month I can back up a 30-day incremental folder of images for long-term storage. If something fucks up or I need something from an old setup, just fire up the tape. I got my LTO4 drive for £99.
>>51595157
they're 800G, if your shit is already compressed, then you won't get any more than 800G of data on each tape
>>51595157
It's going to depend on what you are writing to it.
If you are writing all zip files for example, which are already compressed - you are going to get close to 800G.
If you back up all flat text files, you'll get closer to 1.6T.
With a real world mix of files - you will get somewhere in between.
>>51596264
THANKS FOR YOUR INPUT
>>51596264
>>51595983
CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL
>>51596560
HAY GUYS
SURE IS GETTING LOUD IN HERE
>>51596583
WHAT?
>>51596636
DUDE COME CLOSER I CAN'T HEAR YOU
>>51595157
Are they a good way to back up my japanese animes?
I love how tapes have outlived floppy disks and will probably outlive hard disks as well. We'll probably have computers in 2050 with some holographic memory or some shit and tapes will still be the preferred method of long term storage.
Never obsolete!
is tar and mt the best utilities or is there something else that is better?
>>51596772
I think that's pretty accurate
>>51596702
Backing up is exactly what they're for, but you should probably just delete your anime and become a functioning adult.
>>51596772
they don't have much competition for what they do
floppy disks/hard disks serve different purposes to tapes
floppy disks being inexpensive means of random-writable, portable storage
and hard drives being reasonably big/fast random-access mass storage
while tapes are meant near-one-off mass dumps of data for long term storage purposes, completely forgoing cheapness and random accessibility
>>51596814
>120tb archives
jesus.
What's the timeframe on those?
>>51596952
2050
>>51596952
they're actually 48TB
the fine print says "assuming 2.5:1 compression", aka, they're assuming your 120TB will compress down to 48TB
>>51596998
48TB is still insane.
When will those be available?
>>51597036
this >>51596983
is probably about right
>>51596952
I just realized that shitty picture doesn't include the timeframe
It's TBD at this point but I would say 2025 based on some other charts (assuming some other tape standard doesn't surpass it)
We're at LTO7 and a new standard gets pushed every 2-3 years
Keep in mind that's up to 120tb compressed
>>51597057
>>51596983
are you sure? We're on LTO7 now and LTO gets a new version every 2-3 years based on previous trends
>>51597102
>you will never own a massive tape library like this
>>51595157
its double sided
Do the Manufacturer's drives only work with their own tapes?
>>51597180
No, LTO-4 is a standard like DVD or Blu-ray, one brand tape will work in another brand drive
>>51597102
Imagine this:
1 tape drive + n amount of tapes + arduino
= awesome DIY home tape library robot.
>>51597416
THIS.
I WANT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-eWDuEo-3Q
>>51596583
BUT EVEN WITH CRUISE CONTROL, YOU STILL NEED TO STEER
So, would that be a good idea to do weekly backups?
How much does it cost?
I just need 2TB
>>51597416
Or you could just buy one already made for you on the used market. They make libraries as small as 2U rackmounts.
>>51597416
ARDUINO? DOES IT EVEN LIFT?
>>51598198
5.25'' LTO-5 drives cost around $700-$1000 on the used market not including the price of a SAS controller.
Whether it's worth it or not is up to you.
>>51598415
When talking hundreds of dollars for the drive I'd say $10 for the controller is rather negligible
>>51598415
>>51598198
It sounds like it's super cheap when 3TB cartridge costs ~30$ but then there's the drive which costs shitload of money and if that brakes you have to buy new one or you can't use your tapes for anything.
So unless you're going to archive really HUGE amounts of data, or you can get drive really cheap there's really not much point in home use.
>>51598361
let me guess, starting at 2KUSD +
Autoloaders are a waste of money unless you really need them.
>>51595157
>Buying tape drives unironically
SHE'S STILL PREOCCUPIED WITH 1985
>>51598744
>3TB cartridge costs ~30$
it's actually 1.5TB when you look behind the shitty marketing stunt
>>51598744
SSDS FAIL UR SHITS GONE FOREVER
HDDS FAIL MAYBE RECOVERABLE IF IT STILL SPINS UP
RAID EITHER AND THEY FAIL, REBUILD THE RAID REBUILD THE RAID REBUILD THE RAD, PLUS LARGE POWER CONSUMPTION FOR A BIG HDD ARRAY
TAPE DATA LASTS 20YEARS IN COLD STORAGE, LONGER THAN DATA BLURAYS, THE KING OF ALL BACKUPS
>>51598844
*assuming 2:1 compression
>>51598791
>implying tapes drives aren't used by corporations till this day
Facebook is that way
>>51596264
>ITS PERFECT FOR WRITE ONCE READ MANY
Don't tapes die after like 100 sequential reads?
>>51598867
>Implying they don't use RAID
faggot
I know for a fact that the vast majority of datacenters use spinning drives (even for archival)
tapes are just 2 slow 4 me
>tfw got new LTO4 tapes for 5USD after a while of searching Fleabay
>tfw got a flawless LTO4 FC drive for 100USD after a while more of searching
Feels good. It's all about getting lucky with used enterprise stuff that people are carelessly liquidating.
>>51597830
WHERE WE'RE GOING WE DON'T NEED ANY ROADS
>>51598941
that's because you're looking at some small shithole companies that don't have the scale or budget to even properly archive their data. There are high tech buildings dedicated to archiving business intelligence for huge corporations on tape medium.
>>51598916
LIKE 10K COMPLETE READS BUT IT VARIES BY MANUFACTURER, SONY MAKES GR8 TAPES
IF YOU FIND A TAPE DEGRADED THEYRE SO CHEAP YOU JUST COPY IT OVER TO A NEW ONE
Wow, finally a tape thread
I got a free DAT72 drive with some tapes.
What software would you use for backups?
Data shit has always been like this:
Really short term:
Volatile Flash
Working:
Non-Volatile Flash
Magnetic Disc
Long Term:
Optical - Random Access Needed or Frequently Accessed
Tape - Infrequently Accessed or Large Amounts
I'm broke as fuck.
Where in Australia do you reckon I could get LTO-3 or LTO-4 shit on the cheap?
>>51599226
>Australia
>on the cheap
ur fuckd
>>51599083
HOW WOULD YOU RATE MANUFACTURERS FOR LTO?
HOW ACCURATE IS THIS?
SONY>FUJIFILM>IBM>HP>QUANTUM>OTHER
>>51599226
ebay or a local corporation selling off stock is your most likely bet
>>51599345
WOULDN'T ARGUE WITH THAT, JUST SOME ARE REBRANDED TAPES LIKE DELL AND IBM BRANDED ARE BOTH FUJI TAPES
ALSO TANDBERG IS PRETTY TOPS
>>51596782
Ltfs.
>>51598361
We have a one hu 8tape loader at our Company. I think tandberg Sold them last year.
>>51598778
I actually think you can buy one like the older LTO3(4?) library in the pic for around $300-$600 used, they're surprisingly inexpensive probably because they're so huge they can't go total jew on them like they can with single drives.
I was thinking of grabbing one to fit in my rack to fuck with and run backups on my legacy software archives.
I use an IBM tape library at work with about 2.5PB of data. We have a mixture of LTO4, 5, and 6
>>51595157
>so what does that actually mean?
1,6GB mono or 0,8GB stereo
>>51599733
>europoor decimals
Disgusting, why haven't you killed yourselves yet?
>>51599719
>I actually think you can buy one like the older LTO3(4?) library in the pic for around $300-$600 used
With or without the LTO4 drives? (I know some internal drives are removable from the loaders)
Maybe I wasn't lucky but I only saw a few expensive LTO4 loaders when I was searching to buy. Didn't see anything below 600 USD and found a cheap standalone LTO4 drive so went with that instead. I mean, autoloders are fun but I just couldn't justify it for my needs.
>>51599731
Interesting. Is it just an array of autoloaders? Is the company phasing out of LTO4 already? What's the official 'EOL' of LTO4? (Not even sure if I'm using that term correctly, not up to date on corporatspeak)
