Tandberg LTO5 + Atto HBA + Mac + LFTS = reasonable?

[Tim Jones]

Hi Tim,

I always try to stay away from marketing responses, but I’ve been in this industry for over 28 years and LTFS is a nightmare in expensive marketing hype clothing and an invitation to unexpected data loss. I’ll just drop these links on you:

https://knowledgebase.tolisgroup.com/index.php?View=entry&EntryID=263
https://ww2.productionbackup.com/BRU-vs-LTFS

Backup and archival should be all about restoring your data, and restoring means that the data had to be written to the tape in a reliable manner to start with. There’s a reason why BRU has been around for 27 years. Oh yes, all BRU products work great with the Tandberg Data tape solutions.

Tim
—
Tim Jones
CTO – TOLIS Group, Inc.
https://www.productionbackup.com
BRU … because it’s the RESTORE that matters!

[Tim Dowse]

Hi Tim,

Thanks for this info – I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question. The thing is you guys have an incentive to steer people away from LTFS – do you have any non-TOLIS resources that I could read? It’s like reading a Microsoft article about the limitations of googledocs 😉

I can see that LTFS is limited compared with BRU, but I’m not sure I need all the functionality that BRU offers. I have a very limited amount of money to spend (I don’t control the budgets where I work, and a little extra cash appeared out of nowhere), and I would like to get tape-based archive. An extra $500 for BRU might be out of reach – I might be able to justify it, but I need a little more info to go on.

The only issue in that list that really concerns me is no verification.

Tim Jones Backup and archival should be all about restoring your data, and restoring means that the data had to be written to the tape in a reliable manner to start with.

Clearly you are right of course. Is there information specifically about the unreliability of writing to LTFS tapes because that isn’t addressed in your link directly.

[Tim Jones]

If ignore the comparison and just read the caveats list, it’s not specific to BRU or subjective opinion, but rather to the shortcomings and limitations of using LTFS. We’ve invited the group at LTO.ORG (ne LTFS.ORG) to refute ANY point and we will be happy to drop that list. It’s now been 3 years and the list still stands.

And don’t get me wrong – we’re not completely against LTFS as BRU PE provides support for LTFS tape creation and management. We just want to make sure that people get the balance of both the good and bad (and LTFS.ORG is only touting the good in their marketing). It’s better to be aware of the issues and limitations listed on the caveats list ahead of time than to be caught up in a mess because you weren’t aware of them.

LTFS is great if you just need to swap some tapes, but BRU is there for long term archival by providing truly verifiable and audtiable tapes. On the other hand, so many studios, VFX shops, and post houses also use BRU that even for interchange, the story is a bit weak.

Tim
—
Tim Jones
CTO – TOLIS Group, Inc.
https://www.productionbackup.com
BRU … because it’s the RESTORE that matters!

[Bob Zelin]

Tim writes –
An extra $500 for BRU might be out of reach – I might be able to justify it, but I need a little more info to go on.

I am not aware of any free solutions that works on Mac OS X – period. Cache-A is a proprietary solution for their hardware. There is Tolis Group BRU, there is Retrospect, and there is the new
Imagine Products Pre Post Roll, which is LTFS only, and as Imagine Products states in their description “affordable LTO archive system” which is $499. I was unaware of any OS X Tandberg software solution for LTO. Solutions from Archiware Presstor start at $1500. So exactly what are you looking to spend for this solution ? I am unaware of any free or $39.95 solution on a Mac.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
maxavid@cfl.rr.com

[Kevin Francis]

I definitely wouldn’t recommend using LTFS with the barebones software packages distributed by HP and IBM, at least on a Mac. That is the cheap way to go, but I think if you tried it awhile you’d be disappointed. But in the $500 range you could use PreRollPost, as Bob mentioned, which makes LTFS much more effective and eliminates many of the pitfalls mentioned in the BRU article Tim linked to. And of course, for about the same price there’s BRU, but don’t plan to use it for LTFS, best to use BRU format if you go that route. Retrospect is a little more expensive, but its a proprietary format as well, and not as user friendly.

Archiving to tape is a good thing, all of these products have demos available, so try them out and see what works best for you.

Kevin

[Tim Dowse]

Thanks for your input everybody. This feels like such a murky, dark underworld to the uninitiated.

Bob Zelin I am not aware of any free solutions that works on Mac OS X – period.

I thought that this was the Tandberg free LTFS solution. Is that not right? (he said trembling, preparing to be publicly humiliated)

Kevin Francis That is the cheap way to go, but I think if you tried it awhile you’d be disappointed.

What do you mean disappointed exactly? I can deal with clunky and slow, but obviously not so much with complete failure. I do understand that LTFS has limitations, but literally all I want to do is clone hard drives to tape, and put tapes on the shelf until such time as two hard-drives simultaneously fail, when I will restore from the tape archive.

Having read about the potential issues of trying to copy multiple files at the same time, I intend to make disk images, and copy the whole image file to tape. I have a machine sitting around that can do this in the background, so it won’t slow my work down at all really.

Just seems like $500 for such simple functionality is a lot, especially when LTFS at least on paper will do this for free. I won’t be doing this every day… perhaps something more like once a month.

[Tim Jones]

“Just seems like $500 for such simple functionality is a lot, especially when LTFS at least on paper will do this for free. I won’t be doing this every day… perhaps something more like once a month.”

That’s like saying that $999 for an NLE is a lot for such simple functionality as an editing suite.

If it was easy to do tape I/O on computer systems, everybody would be doing it. And, since Apple has set the bar to entry pretty high because of the complex nature of the low level API, it’s even more difficult on the Mac than on other platforms.

Remember, you’re paying for the free-ness of LTFS by taking full responsibility for its operation if something doesn’t work. With the paid solutions, you get both a better user experience and someone to call if you have questions or run into an issue.

Tim
—
Tim Jones
CTO – TOLIS Group, Inc.
https://www.productionbackup.com
BRU … because it’s the RESTORE that matters!

[Tim Dowse]

Tim Jones That’s like saying that $999 for an NLE is a lot for such simple functionality as an editing suite.

I think it’s more like comparing a pro NLE to iMovie. If someone asked me what software to use to take one clip, put it next to another one, and then export for youtube, I would recommend iMovie, despite me using PP everyday for work. If I don’t need BRU’s excellent functionality, is it not reasonable to look for cheaper solutions?

Tim Jones Remember, you’re paying for the free-ness of LTFS by taking full responsibility for its operation if something doesn’t work.

I understand that. I know a better user experience and customer service has a value. I’m trying to do some kind of cost-benefit analysis – and at this point I remain unsure as to whether the benefits of BRU are worth the cost.

[Tim Jones]

I’m definitely not faulting your logic, and knowing the issues that can evolve with LTFS means that “I” could definitely make it work, but “I” have over 30 years involved in system backup operations and using tape in its various formats.

The question that you need to keep in mind is “if I lose one 1.5TB LTFS tape, how much will it cost me to recreate the data?” Don’t get me wrong, I’m not implying that BRU’s format can save you from a physically lost or damaged tape, but at least we don’t list circumstances that can cause complete tape content loss through normal use of a tape as LTFS does. For example, if you are in the middle of a BRU-based backup and you lose power, you can recover everything that was written to the tape up to the point of power loss. With LTFS, you’ve lost the whole tape’s contents – even stuff that was successfully written previously to that tape.

I agree that the “proof is in the tasting of the pudding,” so run with LTFS for a while. If you do determine that you need more, while I can’t speak to the other solutions, BRU will be here to help you out.

Tim
—
Tim Jones
CTO – TOLIS Group, Inc.
https://www.productionbackup.com
BRU … because it’s the RESTORE that matters!

[Tim Dowse]

Tim Jones “I” have over 30 years involved in system backup operations and using tape in its various formats.

which is experience I really wish I had at this point… And I very much appreciate you taking the time to answer my concerns. I am obviously a newbie, but I do like to take on new things, and I flatter myself that I’m a fast learner. Having read your earlier list of caveats to LTFS, they all seem like things I could work around. The only exception being the unavailability of validation. If there’s good evidence that LTFS-based writing to tape was error prone, then I’d be majorly concerned.

Tim Jones if you are in the middle of a BRU-based backup and you lose power, you can recover everything that was written to the tape up to the point of power loss. With LTFS, you’ve lost the whole tape’s contents – even stuff that was successfully written previously to that tape.

This is an interesting point. But for this to happen, I will need two have two simultaneous hard drive failures, followed by a power loss while I attempt to restore the drive. One hopes that this is an extremely unlikely occurrence. In the three years I’ve been working here we’ve had one power outage. I mean, one can always think of circumstances where all data is lost – but one has to draw the line somewhere. At this point I’m not archiving to tape at all, so it will be a big step just to add that to my current storage system.

Tim Jones so run with LTFS for a while. If you do determine that you need more, while I can’t speak to the other solutions, BRU will be here to help you out.

And I will gladly eat large helpings of humble pie while you repeatedly tell me “I told you so” 🙂 Seriously, thanks for your input, I really do appreciate it. And for what it’s worth, BRU is basically the only paid for option I’ve even considered, so I would be coming straight in your direction.