Backup Tapes: Alive And Kicking 409
yootje writes "The Register runs an article about the future of backup tapes, which looks pretty good. Although some people say backup tapes are dead, tape systems continue to evolve. To prove that, The Register intoduces some new products that are about to come, like the SL8500."
Since everything is dead... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Since everything is dead... (Score:5, Funny)
I dunno... Has Netcraft confirmed that tape jukeboxes are dying too?
Re:Since everything is dead... (Score:2, Funny)
Since everything is digital... (Score:2)
Re:Since everything is dead... (Score:2, Funny)
If it ain't broke... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:If it ain't broke... (Score:5, Interesting)
Although, we *do* also use live HD backups as part of our backup procedure -- just for a single nights backup. Sometimes you need to go back 5 or more days...
Unfortunately... (Score:5, Funny)
Yup. When I can get 10 or 15 2in x 3in sized doo-hickey that can store 80+ gigs at under $20-$30 per doo-hickey, I may change.
you cannot get those features in the Doo-Hickey(tm) line of products. You will need to upgrade to the Widget(tm) line or - in the enterprise arena - to the Super-Widget(tm) family.
We look forward to assisting you with all your thingamabob needs.
Sincerely,
Bob Gadget, Marketing Weenie
Amalgamated Whatzit-Whozit-Howzit Industries
Re:If it ain't broke... (Score:5, Interesting)
Once a backup procedure is in place, it's simply a matter of cycling tapes, grep'in the logs and emailing/sms'ing any alerts. Every friday, send a tape off site, every monday get back the old off-site tape. Replace tapes as they break or after 1 year of service.
While your DVD drive might work, you're pretty much stuck in front of it swapping out 5-10 DVD-Rs for every 40 gigs of data. What fun. Me? I like to go home and sleep during backup cycles. Then scan the logs in the morning. It takes me all of about 30 seconds (including swapping the tapes).
Re: It works in Virginia maybe (Score:4, Interesting)
Glad that tapes work for you in Virginia. I live in the tropics where the air is balmy and airconditioning is at a premium. Tape media of any kind rots here. It is nothing to pick up a stored VHS tape and find it coated in a thick frosting of white mold.
This is why I record everything neatly on coconut husks:P
Re:But why oh why... (Score:5, Interesting)
LTO ownzors DLT. (Score:3, Informative)
And at a price point under 50 cents to the gigabyte. Woooo.
Re:But why oh why... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:But why oh why... (Score:5, Informative)
Since there's no real consumer-need, there's no real consumer model and no consumer production. That keeps the production costs up in the realm of the corporate/business users.
Ebay? [ebay.com]
Re:But why oh why... (Score:4, Interesting)
Ebay's definitely the way to go. Good tape drives, being corporate-targeted fare, are built to last. And there are plenty of servers that came with a tape drive as a standard component that probably never saw more than a couple of dozen backups in their lifetime. That means a cheap, long-lasting tape drive for you.
To give you an idea, I got a Sony DDS4 (20G/40G tapes) about a year and a half ago for ~$275, IIRC. By looking at it, it was barely used, though eyeballs are admittedly pretty weak instruments here. In any event, it's been running weekly backups with no problems at all - no write errors, doesn't chew up tapes, test restores always work. Good enough deal for me...
We still use them (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:We still use them (Score:3, Informative)
Re:We still use them (Score:2)
Yes, our automated systems tend to cost much less than the monkeys :)
Re:You're living in the past (Score:5, Insightful)
BZZZZZT! I'm sorry, but thank you for playing.
What happens when the CEO deletes his stack of porn off the file server? Your RAID-5 isn't going to help you one damn bit. And maybe your company doesn't have the bandwidth to move the 100+GB of data on the fileserver to an offsite backup.
Backups don't just cover hardware failures. They cover people failures.
Re:You're living in the past (Score:4, Funny)
It's much less stressful.
You're living under a rock. (Score:5, Informative)
Hahaha. Yeah. Price out a quality RAID 5 array (i.e. not some little piece of shit you bolted together out of IDE drives and Promise cards.) Something from a major manufacturer, such as an IBM FastT200, will cost you about $50k if you kit it out with 143GB or even 72GB drives.
With tape drives you have to cope with tape standards changing every year.
Where I work, we surplus equipment after 5 years. Our current StorageTek tape silo will be gone before we'd start caring about changing standards. The (12) 9940A and (2) 9940B drives in it are good for 100-200 GB uncompressed. We back up the entire datacenter -- UNIX, VMS, and Windows clients -- and, as long as we keep the scratch pool full, we never run into capacity issues. There is nothing to "cope with", it all Just Works.
Want to read tapes that are more than 5 years old? Not a chance.
Ever hear of backward compatibility? A DLT7000 drive can read any DLT tape you put into it. Same with DDS4, etc. As long as the tapes are stored somewhere safe and climate-controlled (such as, Idono, a datacenter?) you shouldn't ever have a problem reading them. Hell, we still use 5-year-old tape on a daily basis in our smaller IBM silo.
Want to back up anything above 40 GB? You have to buy incredibly expensive DLT instead of DAT, most likely with a robotic tape change mechanism.
Yeah, so?
Costs you about $40000.
You've obviously never priced these things. You need to add a zero. Clearly, data retention and retrieval is not important where you work.
Nice troll, though.
- A.P.
Re:You're living under a rock. (Score:3, Insightful)
Or, if you want a bit cheaper - Promise VTrak 15100 (3U) with an Ultra-160 scsi interface and 15 400G SATA drives Raid-5'd is about 5.47 TB for about $11,000.
This is right in the same pricerange (in $/gig) as a giant spectra-logic 20000 tape changer with 200 AIT-3 tapes. about $85,000 for 31 TB of storage.
So,
Re:You're living in the past (Score:5, Insightful)
Customer: I accidentally modified this file 2 days ago, can I get a backup copy?
You: Sorry, you're screwed.
Me: Yes, I'll have that restored for you as soon as possible. How can I contact you to notify you that it is finished?
We use RAID-5 and tape backup (which is off-site). The RAID covers disk failures; the tape backup covers user screw-ups and disaster recovery. And we've used both frequently enough to make them worth the money.
Re:You're living in the past (Score:3, Insightful)
A RAID-5 array with hot spares or a remote backup site is much more reliable and cost-effective.
Have you forgotton that some places use tape systems for archival storage as well? I suppose near-line is dead as well. Most of the companies that I have worked at use high-rez artwork. At an advertising agency, you are churning out gigs of files that may be used for 6 months tops, yet in 2 years someone will ask for job # 232343-xxx for god knows what reason. We use a 100 tape librar
Re:You're living in the past (Score:3, Interesting)
We want to backup lots of stuff over 40Gb. May I introduce you to my good friend the autoloader [superwarehouse.com]?
Moreover, we use good ol' DDS-3 tapes. Cheap, reliable, fixed standards. We
Re:You're living in the past (Score:4, Insightful)
You're missing the point. Instead of buying a large tape jukebox, buy a SECOND large raid-5 array that is about 5x larger than the first and then write backup images of the first one to the second. Ie weekly full dumps and nightly incrementals - then you can have backups from any time in the last several days, or from each week going back a month or so.
Depending on your mix of restores and the egos of the faculty involved ("Ignore those students and fix MY problem NOW!" - dont get me started about lack of practical computer knowlege some CS professors have) you might be able to more easily find, and more quickly restore your backups from disk images than you might from tape. And you can MUCH more easily verify-after-write your disk images than you can your tape images.
You'll find that a big raid array or two will cost in the same range as a big AIT-3 jukebox in $/TB of storage.
You LOOSE offsite backup though and the ability to buy more media so you can occasionally make long-term archives.
A medium sized RAID-5 Array with a smaller cheaper single-tape drive would address both issues and might cost less. It would also certainly have quicker restores.
Re:You're living in the past (Score:3, Informative)
IBM sell a LTO2 tape drive with autoloader, about $10000, capacity of 200GB uncompressed per tape (400gb with hardware compression), capable of holding 7 tapes, giving 1.5TB of storage for a fraction of the cost of a raid5 array of similar storage capacity and reliability, all in the space of a shoebox.
How much is this remote backup site link going to cost when you're going to copy 400GB of data a day to it? over here in the uk you'd be looking at $100k or more a year if the distance was
Re:We still use them (Score:3, Informative)
My backup tapes are dead (Score:3, Informative)
Re:My backup tapes are dead (Score:2)
Backups are here to stay... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem that killed it for us is when you're transfering to an 80 gig drive over firewire, you completely hog the hell out of the system, making it all but unavailable during the meantime. I don't know of any way to "throttle" the backup, there's probably some obscure tweak though.
Tape transfer rates are comparitively slow, which leave plenty of room for the computer to carry on it's tasks. Sure it might take all night to do a full back up, but the servers available during that time.
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:2)
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:2)
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:2, Insightful)
In that case, I think we're on the same page. For under a TB, especially if it's not a lot of hosts to back up, I'd go with hard drives, too. It's hard to make an argument for tapes with backup sets that small.
Now, for 90PB, I think we'd both have a hard time finding a HD-based solution that would be anywhere near the price/performance of tape.
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also imagine trying to do disk drive rotation for off-site storage versus the same thing for tapes. I'd prefer tapes any
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:4, Insightful)
None of this really matters to small installations, but to enterprise installations these things are a lot more important.
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:3, Informative)
130 GB for an AIT-2 tape is compressed capacity. It's 50GB uncompressed. You get an around 200GB ATA disk for $100. As the data compresses just as well on the disk that's half the $ per unit. You can build storage units with 8 disks each for around $250 (case, cheapo motherboard+cpu+memory+ata controller).
At many capacities that will be _far_ cheaper than tape storage.
It's been a long long time since tape was cheaper for backups for most data sizes. And it's not getting bett
Re:Backups are here to stay... (Score:3, Insightful)
AIT-3 is indeed twice the capacity, but the drives are in the 5K range as far as I can tell.
And none of the tape solutions we've discussed actually include a real lib (only a reader, unless you found a really cheap lib), while the IDE solutions I've suggested are all on-line (altho they would have disadva
I remember using tape in my old C64. (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh yeah!? (Score:2)
I couldn't give mine away! (though it served me well for several years)
Re:I remember using tape in my old C64. (Score:2)
Wikipedia says... [wikipedia.org]
Magnetic tape was first used to record data in 1951 on the Mauchly-Eckert UNIVAC I. The recording medium was a thin band of solid steel. Recording density was 128 characters per inch at a linear speed of 100 ips, yielding a data rate of 12800 characters per second.
CC.
Tapes are here to stay (for now) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Tapes are here to stay (for now) (Score:2)
A very good point, especially for archival purposes. Even the most expensive CDs still do not age well, yet tapes 30 years old still have readable data with few errors. Now, the machines/software to read those tapes may not be around...
It sure isn't dead here! (Score:3, Informative)
With CD/DVD Rot, tape sounds good (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:With CD/DVD Rot, tape sounds good (Score:3, Insightful)
For perspective, a 100GB/200GB LTO1 tape costs like $55US. I'd say that is a pretty good deal in the price department. Tapes will be around for many years to come. For archival and most sisater recovery, there aren't many better solutions.
On the other hand, that LTO tape drive is going to rock you over $2500. Compare that to the $250 I bought my original Colorado Jumbo 250MB tape drive fo
I can verify this (Score:2)
Offsite Backup Services? (Score:2)
True, but I've had tapes go bad on me and become unreadable too. Others have posted about having tape drives eat tapes and destroy them. Any real numbers out there on the reliability of tapes on the shelf versus drives on the shelf?
I have been casually looking into using an offsi
Re:I can verify this (Score:2)
Backup equipment gets replaced because more and more capacity is needed all the time, and the QIC-250 cartridges created using an archaic backup program may still be in the cellar, but who will be able to read them in 10 years?
Tape's still alive...according to HP (Score:5, Informative)
Tapes are nice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Tapes are nice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Tapes are nice.. (Score:2)
No, I was suggesting some sort of networked, distributed alternative. Like a P2P service. The server would have all the files, but there would exist multiple copies of the image distributed and shared among several clients. If the server goes down, you could rebuild it from the nodes.
You'd obviously need a high-speed connection to pull this off.
yeah that is the way to go (Score:2)
Satisfaction guaranteed.
Re:Tapes are nice.. (Score:2)
You have to figure out just how important your data is to you. The most common solution is to take one backup tape (a complete backup, not just a delta) home with you each week. You buy a couple of extra tapes and you can always have one month's worth of weekly backups at home. If you want you can become more anal you can take each nights tape home with you the next night, but most small companies can live with being able to recover from one week old data. The bigge
Re:Tapes are nice.. (Score:2)
So you should use different methods and/or different schedules for quick file restoration and for disaster recovery.
Re:Tapes are nice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember, there are several main things that backups cover. It's important to remember which you're doing, and which are importante:
1) Disaster recovery. Full system restoration at a remote site (if the building collapses, will you be back up and functionional in $NUMBER hours?) This usually involves full system backups, using the most tapes. You can get away with weekly incrimentals, but beyond that you're doing too much tape shuffling at the restoration facility. This means a nightly backup, this means a LOT of tapes, and some largish libraries doing some serious throughput. Thankfully, your retention window is really short. 2 runs through that 'week' interval is usually all you'd need.
2) File recovery. This is long term storage, of mostly user data. "I deleted this file by accident, can I get it back?" "We dropped this table because it wasn't useful anymore, but we just discovered that this important monthly process actually does use it... can we get the data back?", etc. This doesn't take as much throughput or tapes per night as DR does (since you don't need the full OS image anymore), but the killer is the retention window. 6 months? A year? This is usually a policy decision for the people wearing suits.
3) Archival. This the data that 3 letter government agencies require you to keep for $BIGNUM years (usually 7 or so). Financial data, some customer data, etc. Thankfully, it's usually a thin subset of your normal data lode, and doesn't require much throughput to deal with. However, the storage requirements suck, and the media requirements are evil too. Just how do you restore a tape from a manufacturer who went out of business 3 years ago? CD's work well for this, as do some mainstream tape venders. Stay close to standards, since interoperability will save your bacon.
This is a huge problem. Backup to Disk is nifty, and makes lots of money for companies like EMC, but it isn't a good solution for anything other than DR. If you need long term file recovery, or worse data archiving, it's not going to work, and TAPE (or sometimes CD/DVDs) are the only game in town.
And many people forget the biggest thing of all: TEST YOUR BACKUP STRATAGY. Go offsite and try to restore some servers. How long does it take? How long can your enterprise survive? I work at a gas company, and parts of our enterprise are government mandatated to be back up and running in 12 hours. This is not easy.
Re:Tapes are nice.. (Score:2)
The usual "user deleted or damaged a file" case is quickly handled using the disks. No need to walk to the computerroom to insert a tape, and wait for it to load and seek.
The offsite weekly backup is for disaster recovery.
Tape let me down.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Definitely Not Dead Yet... (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, 270 some of our servers are on WAN links, between 56k and 256k circuits. Not exactly speedy when you think of backing up over the network. Also, the bulk of our data is done in our data centers - two of them. We have to have the data offsite.
Old saying (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Old saying (Score:2, Funny)
Wow (Score:3, Funny)
The only thing that hurts worse is trying to find a space to put an 8ft x 30ft x 200ft storage device that weighs 310k pounds (140.9 metric tons(2200lbs))
Re:Wow (Score:3, Funny)
Some of those hard drives can hold up to 80MB of data.. holy crap.. think of what you could do with 80,000,000 bytes of space... it hurts to even think about it...
Price (Score:2)
A northern climate would be best it seems, as it dissapates 1.4M BTU of heat per hour.
Long live 4mm and 8mm tapes (Score:3, Interesting)
We still use some 8mm tapes to back up some RS/6000 systems. We use 4mm tapes for the Sun and HP servers.
I would like to migrate everything to one format, but red tape has thus far prevented me from doing anything about it. I have a proposal for converting to sDLT, but corporate policy forbids anyone except the purchasing department from speaking to vendors about pricing, and purchasing won't speak to vendors at all unless they have an authorized capital expense form. I can't build the business case to get a capital expense form until I get pricing information from the vendors. It's a bitter cycle
So, I sincerely hope my 4mm and 8mm jukeboxes stay alive and functional for the forseeable future, since I can't get approval to evergreen those systems with something cheaper and better!
Re:Long live 4mm and 8mm tapes (Score:2)
You can't go to pricewatch to even get a vague idea?
Not going ANYWHERE anytime soon... (Score:3, Informative)
We backup from the systems via gigabit Ethernet, to the TSM server, where the data is stored in a disk pool.
That disk pool gets flushed out to an IBM 3584 tape library. LTO2 tape drives. Great stuff.
TSM then duplicates those LTO2 tapes, and ejects
the copies from the library, for offsite storage.
Tape's going to be here for a LONG, LONG time.
Requisite links:
TSM - http://www-306.ibm.com/software/tivoli/products/s
IBM 3584 -
http://www.storage.ibm.com/tape/lto/index.html
If backup tapes are alive and well (Score:2)
...then all we need is a revival of the big station wagons!
Re:If backup tapes are alive and well (Score:2)
Re:If backup tapes are alive and well (Score:2)
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of backup tapes."
Um... huh? Who said tape had no future? (Score:2)
They'd also probably laugh you out of the room if you proposed backing stuff up to anything but tape...
- A.P.
The problem with all these tape technologies... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with all of these endless new tape technologies is that after they come they (or their vendors) tend to become lethargic and lose interest in the whole process so that six months later they're trying to sell you yet another replacement technology.
That's fine for something like a computer that can run the same software each generation, but for tape devices the need to change media is like having to re-code your application in a new language every time you upgrade the computer. People don't want to do it.
Most customers want a backup media that will still be viable in at least seven years because of legal requirements. That can mean needing to be able to buy a drive that can read their tapes 5-12 years from now. How many of these new tape technologies will have that kind of staying power?
The standard 9-track 2400 foot open reel tape served the computer industry for about 30 years, providing a standard storage and interchange mechanism for pretty much every computer larger than a PC. The Internet has rendered the need for an interchange mechanism less critical, but the instability in the archival storage formats is now giving people serious headaches.
G.
Re:The problem with all these tape technologies... (Score:2)
As for disk how many PC's can still use an RLL controler or ESDI PC's dont even have ISA slots anymore to house them. These were common hard drives only 15 years ago. SCSI has endured but IDE is allready on it's way out the door do you think in 7 years you will still be able to fine an IDE controler that w
who said tapes were dying? (Score:2)
btw, that SL8500 has what appears to be a max capacity of 90 Petabytes (!!!) so i'm wondering
Re:who said tapes were dying? (Score:2)
So far, I haven't seen any tape scenario that is as cost-effective as a redundant server, with both using RAID. Next best is to simply back up each file to optical, as it is recorded. That's easy to do, cheap, and much of the content is h
Re:who said tapes were dying? (Score:3, Insightful)
For one I think CERN expects to generate on the order o
Separation of media and r/w h/w (Score:2)
Normal Harddrives fail pitifully on this point. The drive electronics, read write heads, etc is so tied in with the physical disks that it makes it difficult to remove the disks and pop them into a working device with the ease of tapes, CDs etc.
Tapes, CDs, floppies are very clean and hassle free from this standpoint. The cartridge/media is of a standard size and c
Dear The Register, (Score:2)
Sincerely,
Erik Lehnsherr
Re:Dear The Register, (Score:2)
How do you plan to do backups on your 500GB RAID array?
Buying server for new business today (Score:3, Insightful)
~$340 for both. Keep one plugged in for daily backup, keep the other in a safe place... swap them every month.
Pretty cheap, plenty fast, and won't take up much space!
yes, they save, they scale but does the hardware? (Score:2)
Yeah, I've got all my data stored from 20 years ago on big old 1/2" Open Reel Nine Track Tape, so what? Without working hardware that can be read and scaled on a system I currently have, then I'll need to convert it.
Note the emphasis on "working hardware"
Optical media is too small. (Score:5, Insightful)
And getting the office receptionist(often the person who will do the job of managing the media) to swap disks is often asking too much. It has to fit on one tape/disk/whatever or it isn't going to get done.
Tape especially DAT drives give most bang for the buck.
Re:Optical media is too small. (Score:2)
For SOHO businesses, I'd agree -- DAT all the way. The tapes are pretty damn cheap, and widely available. The only possible sticking point could be the cost of the drive, but when you contrast the price of under $2K (for the drive/autoloader) with the cost of a server crash/storage loss, it looks like a good investment real quick.
Backup tapes (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Backup tapes (Score:3, Insightful)
You said it yourself. "Reasonably reliable." For the vast majority of us in the business world, the whole reason that we make backups is because disks themselves are only "Reasonably reliable." I'm paying for "highly reliable" or greater. Without it, I'll take my chances on a nice RAID array
Re:Backup tapes (Score:3, Informative)
> You said it yourself. "Reasonably reliable."
Actually, it is perfectly possible to achieve reliable data transfer (or storage) through an unreliable medium, using error correction codes.
Even with a crappy chewed up tape, it is possible to pefectly recover the data, as long as the data is properly interleaved and a robust error correction code is used.
Re:Backup tapes (Score:3, Informative)
Tape is a good, solid storage solution. (Score:4, Funny)
Harumph!
price:GB? (Score:2)
Re:price:GB? (Score:2)
A single 300GB ATA drive stores over 60 DVDs.
Tape Capacities v. Disk Capacities (Score:2)
(1) There are far more hard drives produced each year than there are tape drives and so there's much more of an incentive to increase the capacity of hard drives.
Back in the day, 86-88ish, I was a part-time computer operator at Carnegie Mellon. We ran nightly incremental and weekly full backups onto 1/2 inch (I think it was 1/2 inch)
This makes the case for good remote backup (Score:3, Interesting)
We've used these beasts on site and some of them are so large they need their own fire code certification.
I deal with tape every day at work... (Score:3, Interesting)
For home use, get a ancient PC, put a good hard drive in it, install Linux with Bacula (www.bacula.org) & only backup your data (not the entire OS) directly to disk. In the long run you'll be much farther ahead on cost & performance. If you ever have a crash, re-install the OS then restore the data.
I salvaged an 11 year old 486-66DX with 24mb ram. Put a 120GB HD in it, an ethernet card, and installed Debian with Bacula. All together it cost me less than $100 to provide a backup solution for three PCs. Everything is scheduled to backup automatically & I get emails if something doesn't work.
Anyway, that's my $0.02. Businesses obviously have different priorities.
Relative cost of disk vs. tape (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyone else heard this?
Re:Dead? (Score:2)
Tapes still have the most bang-for-the-buck value.
Hmm..
Exabyte 50Gb Mammoth II 75M AME Data Cartridge 00572 - $35
100pack DVD-R 4.7GB Blank Media General Purpose DVDR Disc - $27
Tape: $35/50GB = $0.70 per GB
DVDR: $27/470GB = $0.05 per GB
??
Re:Tape WILL die, but isn't dead yet (Score:3, Informative)
"c) mechanisms exist for easy and fast off-site archival storage" (emphasis mine).
The biggest and most critical use of tape for many companies (outside of a fairly small window of a few weeks or months), is utter disaster recovery, legal compliance, and intelligence protection. That leads to tapes being kept offsite for a long time (seven years here--probably the same in the USA). Stuffing labelled t