In the message dated: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 22:44:25 -0400,
The pithy ruminations from John Drescher on 
<Re: [Bacula-users] tapes randomly become unrecognizeable> were:
=> > DO NOT PRINT YOUR OWN LABELS
=> > EVER
=> 
=> I have for the last 100 or so tapes and I have had 0 issues with that.
=> 

In my experience, the readability of barcode labels is highly dependant on the
combination of the label and the barcode reader.

Since 2006 we've had:
        LTO2 library    ~100 pre-printed labels, no problem
        LTO3 library    ~100 pre-printed labels, no problem
                        ~50 in-house labels, no problem
                        ~100 in-house labels, no problem
                        ~50 in-house labels, no problem

        LTO3 2nd library        ~50 in-house labels, ~1% failure rate
        LTO3 2nd library        ~50 in-house labels, ~1% failure rate
        LTO4            50 pre-printed labels, no problem
                        50 in-house LTO4 labels: ~75% failure
                                ~75% failure reading existing LTO3
                                in-house labels (100% failure for some
                                batches, ~25% failure for other batches)

                                ~ 5% failure rate reading pre-printed
                                LTO3 labels

Over the years, we've used different parameters for printing labels,
with extremely minor changes (mm) in the height and width of the labels.
All labels were printed with a color laser printer onto self-adhesive
(Avery 6577) label stock, following the TriOptic color coding and the
USS-39 barcode standard.

However, each the barcode reader on each of our tape libraries is
different--some (the 2nd LTO3 library) were slightly sensitive to
the label placement (whether it was straight, whether it was to the
left/right/top/bottom of the indented region on the tape cassette),
while the reader in our current LTO4 library is extremely sensitive to
the barcode size, label position, stray ink or discoloration on the edge
of a label, etc. The LTO4 libarary has even had difficulty reading some
pre-printed labels.

We've used the following on-line barcode generators, as well as local perl
scripts:

        http://www.mytapelabels.com/
        http://blog.maniac.nl/index.php/webbased-pdf-lto-barcode-generator/

In short, I'd say that the success--or failure--of locally generated barcode
labels is highly dependent on the combination of the label and the barcode
scanner; there is no absolute answer for every environment.

Mark

        
=> John
=> 
=> 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
Mark Bergman                              voice: 215-662-7310
mark.bergman AT uphs.upenn DOT edu                 fax: 215-614-0266
System Administrator     Section of Biomedical Image Analysis
Department of Radiology            University of Pennsylvania
      PGP Key: https://www.rad.upenn.edu/sbia/bergman 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to 
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users