Amanda-Users

Re: hardware vs software compression (was Re: amflush/amcheck not in sync?)

2003-05-23 16:04:50
Subject: Re: hardware vs software compression (was Re: amflush/amcheck not in sync?)
From: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett AT verizon DOT net>
To: Jon LaBadie <jon AT jgcomp DOT com>, amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 14:20:22 -0400
On Thu April 24 2003 10:52, Jon LaBadie wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 10:10:35AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> the propaganda claims because while you /etc dir may compress
>> very well, that dir full of archive or music is going to expand
>> in the hardware compressor, as that sort of stuff has already
>> been smunched and isn't further compressible.
>
>Just an informational note.
>
>I attended a talk at a local SA group about tape technology
> presented by a FUJI rep.
>
>One of the interesting things at that talk was that some newer
> formats/drives have "adaptive compression".  The drive compresses
> data to onboard memory rather than to tape and if the data did
> not compress writes the original data to tape.  It does this
> dynamically, even within a single tape file.

Interesting Jon.  But I'd be willing to bet my old DDS2 drive isn't 
even remotely close to that smart.  Did the speaker name names?

-- 
Cheers, Gene
AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M
Athlon1600XP@1400mhz  512M
99.26% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2003 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: hardware vs software compression (was Re: amflush/amcheck not in sync?), Gene Heskett <=