I've worked with both drive types (SDLT and LTO).  I'm going to have to
tip my hat to LTO.

With SLDT I and II we did have some "calibration track" issues; depending
which drive wrote the track, other drives had problems with a tape.  It
was resolved with drive replacement.  Performance was quite good with both
I and II.

The IBM LTO2 drives have what they refer to as "adaptive rate" technology;
the drive slows down or speed up to match the input rate and keep the
drive moving. What we've seen is more steady throughput that helps when
the group is down to one last slow client. Throughput is great to amazing.

Going from DLT4000, I think you'll be pleased with either SDLT to LTO.

Robert Maiello
Pioneer Data Systems

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 17:06:19 -0400, Teresa Biehler <tpbsys AT RIT DOT EDU> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>
>
>One of my colleagues is researching options for replacing a tape
>autoloader.  They are currently using DLT-4000 (Dell PowerVault 120T)
>and are looking at either SDLT 320 or LTO-2 drives.  How do these two
>technologies compare?  What would you recommend?
>
>
>
>Thanks.
>
>Teresa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
>to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
>also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
>should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=