Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Copy disk to tape is 4x slower than tar

2016-03-17 09:21:11
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Copy disk to tape is 4x slower than tar
From: Cejka Rudolf <cejkar AT fit.vutbr DOT cz>
To: Alan Brown <ajb2 AT mssl.ucl.ac DOT uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:14:37 +0100
Alan Brown wrote (2016/03/17):
> Caveat: BDXL is up to 120GB per disc (quad layer) and  It _may_ be worth 
> investigating this format for backups, but bacula doesn't play nicely 
> with optical media.
> 
> HVD development (6TB per disc) was abandoned in 2008. Ritek demonstrated 
> 250GB BDXL discs (10 layer) 8 years ago but they've never been marketed. 
> Ditto with Pioneer's 400GB BDXL format and the "1TB Blueray" disk is now 
> 4 years past proposed launch date. What's killed all these "smaller" 
> formats is cheap(ish) HDD/SSDs, cloud storage and the likes of Netflix. 
> That's despite even BDXL 120GB not being large enough capacity to hold a 
> complete 4k video title.

I think that two main killers for all these optical things for data
storage are unbelief in reliability (or simply unreliability) and
slooowness.

-- 
Rudolf Cejka <cejkar at fit.vutbr.cz> http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/~cejkar
Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Information Technology
Bozetechova 2, 612 66  Brno, Czech Republic

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785231&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>