Networker

Re: [Networker] SUN X4500 'Thumper' as a storage node?

2007-04-24 01:38:34
Subject: Re: [Networker] SUN X4500 'Thumper' as a storage node?
From: Oscar Olsson <spam1 AT QBRANCH DOT SE>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:36:38 +0200
On 2007-04-23 14:15, Stan Horwitz revealed:

SH> We don't currently do any kind of disk-to-disk-to-anything backups. I do not

Ive been following this thread for a while now. What I can't figure out is 
why one would want to stage from disk to disk when it comes to backups? 
Why not write to the secondary disk storage (i.e. cheap disk) right away? 
There are several cheap storage systems (for instance the systems from 
http://www.infortrend.com) where they just supply a disk array, where you 
then buy off-the-shelf products such as actual disks and controller RAM 
yourself. In terms of I/O performance, even these systems should be more 
than enough for backups. So why do people use tiered disk for backups, or 
VTLs? To me, the point of VTL is just to work around backup products that 
aren't good at working with file systems or block devices as targets of 
backup data. VTLs just seem to limit the functionality of the actual disk, 
by emulating library behavior, with its set of limitations such as random 
paralell I/O. Why not just use adv_file devices instead, and then just 
stage that data to tape?

//Oscar

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER