Networker

Re: [Networker] IBM versus Quantum versus HP LTO-3?

2007-01-30 20:04:00
Subject: Re: [Networker] IBM versus Quantum versus HP LTO-3?
From: George Sinclair <George.Sinclair AT NOAA DOT GOV>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:56:41 -0500
Thanks for the link! I was wondering where they'd squirreled that away to.

It's odd, though, because the current documentation that Quantum has, and another source I found all indicate that LTO3, 2 and 1 use 0x44, 0x42 and 0x40 for the density codes respectively.

However, Legato's older document indicates density=0x00 for both LTO-1 and LTO-2 for IBM and HP.
This seems like an odd discrepancy.

We have one Linux storage node that runs the STK L80 with LTO-1 Seagate drives that we'll be upgrading to IBM LTO-3. We also have an older SDLT-1 Quantum library attached as well. The stinit.def file uses the 0x00 code for the LTO drives, but I'm not sure where we got that stinit.def file from, and we've been using it for the past several years. I think I pulled it off the internet way back when, but it's the same
as what Legato has. Here's the entry we have for the LTO-1:

manufacturer=SEAGATE model = "ULTRIUM06242-XXX" {
can-bsr scsi2logical drive-buffering
timeout=800
long-timeout=14400
mode1 blocksize=0 density=0x00  # as close as possible to st.conf entry
}

Maybe this was never correct to begin with, but this has worked fine for us. Now, I'm wondering what will happen when I try to read those tapes on the new LTO-3 drives with the following modes:

mode 1 blocksize=0 density=0x44 compression=1 # ULTRIUM 3 density, compression on mode 2 blocksize=0 density=0x44 compression=0 # ULTRIUM 3 density, compression off mode 3 blocksize=0 density=0x42 compression=1 # ULTRIUM 2 density, compression on mode 4 blocksize=0 density=0x40 compression=0 # ULTRIUM density, compression

Our other Linux storage node is running a newer Quantum library with SDLT-600 drives. It's stinit.def file matches the current information that Quantum has for the SDLT600 device, and
that's where I got that one from.

George

Yaron Zabary wrote:

  The best I could find is:

ftp://ftp.legato.com/pub/HW_Support/compatguide/stinit.def

IBM LTO-2 only and the comments clearly states: "may need additional tweaks". This is from the old Legato site (file is from 2003).

George Sinclair wrote:

Can anyone recommend which drive manufacturer to use for LTO-3 (HP, IBM or Quantum (Certance)?
Does anyone overtly not recommend IBM or had bad experiences with these?

We have NW 7.2.2 running on a Linux RH storage node with a Storagetek L80 tape library, currently running older Seagate LTO-1 drives. STK shipped us four IBM LTO-3 drives for our LTO-3 upgrade (same tape library).

I can't get any technical support from IBM since the equipment is not under contract with IBM. I've been unable to locate an online manual for these drives. I searched through IBM's site and elsewhere and could not find anything that discusses any specifics regarding these drives in regards to keyword values for Linux stinit.def entries like timeout, long-timeout, etc. Legato's documentation specifically states that Linux uses stinit.def, and their hardware compatibility guide suggests using the Linux st driver as this has been tested.

I found some information at Quantum's site and one other st_conf.c document pertaining to Sun, and these seem to corroborate that the density code would be 0x44 for LTO-3, 0x42 for LTO-2, etc. but nothing about the various keyword values or timeout
values.

Legato's documentation is very limited. The only place I could find a sample stinit.def was under the Linux installation guide (pdf), but this doesn't even include LTO, and mentions that the compatibility guides contain stinit information, but I couldn't find anything under there related to stinit.def. The Linux installation guide suggests that you "...refer to the tape device manufacturer's requirements for
the specific device and model being used."

Was wondering if we should request that STK take these drives back and replace them with HP? My main concern is not being able to get the support for these drives in terms of the stinit.def entries, etc., but if there are other reasons
that we should NOT consider using IBM drives, I'd be curious to know.

STK didn't seem to know much about stinit.def and mentioned that it's not needed, but I'm doubtful on that.

If anyone is using IBM LTO drives with Linux, I'd be interested to know what your stinit.def file looks like and any help.

Thanks.

George





--
George Sinclair - NOAA/NESDIS/National Oceanographic Data Center
SSMC3 4th Floor Rm 4145       | Voice: (301) 713-3284 x210
1315 East West Highway        | Fax:   (301) 713-3301
Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282  | Web Site:  http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/
- Any opinions expressed in this message are NOT those of the US Govt. -
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