Thank you for the review.
It is much appreciated.

Justin.

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, Steve Frewin wrote:

> We use the Scalar i2000 at two different locations configured with
> LTO-II drives. While I cannot compare it to the SL8500. The library has
> been reliable and when presented with data streams equal to the spec'd
> tape drive throughput  it has had little or no overhead when writing to
> tape. Many of the components are hot swappable and redundant, allowing
> the library to remain online  even when changing  components. The drive
> sleds provide and easy means to upgrade to later generations of LTO or
> to change tape technology completely (tape slots can be reconfigured. We
> very seldom use the touch screen, but do make extensive use of the web
> interface for amongst other things its reporting capabilities. The
> Scalar i2000 was a good fit for our locations as the footprint is the
> same as a standard server rack.
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:23:26 -0500 (EST)
>> From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz AT lucidpixels DOT com>
>> Subject: [Veritas-bu] Speaking of tape libraries.. SL8500 vs. SCI2K
>>      (SCALAR I2000)?
>> To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
>> Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901280621050.1662 AT p34.internal DOT lan>
>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Does anyone on this list use a SCI2K (SCALAR I2000) (LTO/3000 slot
>> library)?
>>
>> How does this compare in terms of redundancy and performance to an SL8500?
>>
>> Which would you recommend?
>>
>> Justin.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu