Matt wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Why logical volume?' on Thu, Sep 16 at 09:52:

I thought we were talking storage not replacing NIC cards. NICs are .99 cents at the local computer store here, so yes a retool of a NETWORK

Do they make you cut 1/100 of the penny off before paying, or does sales tax take care of that? --Danny, who would *never* use a 99 cent network card on an important network (ie, one that pays the bills)

Well when you graduate to the real world and get to use equipment made in the same year that you bought it you will see that $12K for 4TB in a self contained appliance is a deal. But I'm sure your busy working with some dual 500 MHZ dell box from 1998. NIC for 99 cents http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0149773 after rebate and a quick look on pricewatch show a bunch at 3 bucks. Not a consultant, I just work with large systems and have SLA of 99.999 uptime. On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 10:53, Michael W Cocke wrote:

On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 08:51:31 -0600, you wrote:

...

I thought we were talking storage not replacing NIC cards. NICs are .99 cents at the local computer store here, so yes a retool of a NETWORK should be cheap. $12K for 4 TB w/ dual controllers and 2GB cache is CHEAP. My IBM shark (ESS) runs about $35K per TB added (Thats is USED storage new is almost $50K) with a $650K initial price tag. My SAN director (big switch) was $96K by itself. So you see $12K is a friggin bargain.

12K is a bargain? You must be a consultant. and .99 for a 100baseT nic? Sure thing...

Having demonstrated that you don't know anything about computers in the real business world, I've got other things to do with my time.

Mike-

...

On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 17:26, Michael W Cocke wrote:

...

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:30:25 -0600, you wrote:

...

I guess I'm spoiled then cause I use SAN's. NAS or DAS would work too. I haven't tried to stuff disks into a chassis in a long time. 4TB RAW with dual controllers, each with 1GB cache, 2GB FC SAN connection = $12K, so I do not see why you would even try.

12K and you don't see why I don't try? Must be nice not to have to watch the budget. My clients tend toward small manufacturing companies. If I spent that kind of money on 1 server, I wouldn't have many clients. The last time I rebuilt a whole LAN (changing all 40+ systems from 10base2 to 100baseT, cables & switches and 2 new servers) I didn't spend that much. My people hire me because they can't afford to keep I.T. staff on the payroll - they sure don't have 12K to throw around on that kind of thing.

Mike-

-- If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs... You may have a great career as a network administrator ahead! -- Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,

-- If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs... You may have a great career as a network administrator ahead! -- Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments, -- Thank you,

Matt Duval Sr. Systems Engineer HealthTrans www.healthtrans.com "Transforming Healthcare, One Transaction At A Time" (720) 493-8252 6061 South Willow Drive Suite 125 Greenwood Village, CO 80111

I also agree to stop the bashing, but in Matt's defense, He DOES have real world experience. I've been trying to follow this thread, but don't feel like getting involved into a pissing contest, but somehow i'm just going to dive in here. Mike sounds like he doesn't know much about running an enterprise and what it takes to spend to do so, so I'm not sure why he tried to bash Matt in the first place. S***, I wish we only spent 12k for 4TB. We use HDS Storage which is CRAZY expensive! Spent over a mill on 20TB. You want to play with the big boys, your going to need to spend some money....end of story! On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 13:22:40 -0400, Ken Schneider wrote:

On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 13:04, Matt T. Duval wrote:

...

Well when you graduate to the real world and get to use equipment made in the same year that you bought it you will see that $12K for 4TB in a self contained appliance is a deal. But I'm sure your busy working with some dual 500 MHZ dell box from 1998. NIC for 99 cents http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0149773 after rebate and a quick look on pricewatch show a bunch at 3 bucks. Not a consultant, I just work with large systems and have SLA of 99.999 uptime.

OK guys, we really don't need mud slinging here.

Some folks have -not- had the experience of working in an I.T. dept that has a budget of several million $. Please try and keep thing in perspective.

-- Ken Schneider unix user since 1989 linux user since 1994 SuSE user since 1998 (5.2) * PLEASE only reply to the list *

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

Carlos E. R. wrote:

The 2004-09-16 at 13:29 -0400, Michael Kershaw wrote:

...

S***, I wish we only spent 12k for 4TB. We use HDS Storage which is CRAZY expensive! Spent over a mill on 20TB. You want to play with the big boys, your going to need to spend some money....end of story!

On a related note, what do you use to backup such beasties? Tapes in mammoth size reels, perhaps? :-)

Just curious.

A *BIG* pile of floppies! ;-)

At 04:46 PM 18/09/2004, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* James Knott [09-18-04 12:55]:

...

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On a related note, what do you use to backup such beasties? Tapes in mammoth size reels, perhaps? :-)

Just curious.

A *BIG* pile of floppies! ;-)

8" or 5-1/4" <grin>

just has to be one of the old IBM 78" record platter types. <big grin> a whole 64k per side (had to turn over to use the second side though) better than paper tape (backup for my old pdp-8) scsijon

-- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

At 05:45 PM 20/09/2004, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* scsijon [09-20-04 17:39]:

...

just has to be one of the old IBM 78" record platter types. <big grin>

a whole 64k per side (had to turn over to use the second side though)

But you had to cut the write-protect notch...

no such thing in those days, just had to worry about magnetics. scsijon

James, On Thursday 23 September 2004 17:32, James Knott wrote:

...

There were however, write enable rings on tape reels and some disk packs. There were also some disk packs, with a slider to enable writing.

Don't nine-track tapes still use write-rings? I haven't touched one of those things for almost two decades, but somewhere in a box in a closet a fragment of my early professional life is recorded on one. I wonder if I'll ever be able to retrieve that stuff? RRS

On Monday 20 September 2004 20:21, James Knott wrote:

scsijon wrote:

...

At 04:46 PM 18/09/2004, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

* James Knott [09-18-04 12:55]:

...

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On a related note, what do you use to backup such beasties? Tapes in mammoth size reels, perhaps? :-)

Just curious.

A *BIG* pile of floppies! ;-)

8" or 5-1/4" <grin>

just has to be one of the old IBM 78" record platter types. <big grin>

a whole 64k per side (had to turn over to use the second side though)

better than paper tape (backup for my old pdp-8)

Back in the mid '70s, someone (Interface Age Magazine?) tried storing computer programs, on those thin records, that could be included with magazines. IIRC, they used the "Kansas City" standard, for recording the data. Byte Magazine also used bar codes, to publish software.

I hope somewhere someplace this thread is preserved for posterity's sake. A couple of hundred years from now some programmer might say." Geez, look at that ! amazing !!" Bob S.

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 16:46:09 -0500 Patrick Shanahan writes:

* James Knott [09-18-04 12:55]:

...

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On a related note, what do you use to backup such beasties? Tapes in mammoth size reels, perhaps? :-)

Just curious.

A *BIG* pile of floppies! ;-)

8" or 5-1/4" <grin>

if you still have a working 8" drive I hear the smithsonian is buying. Seems they have old data trapped on such and need to move it to new formats. CWSIV ________________________________________________________________ Get your name as your email address. Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and more Only $1.99/ month - visit http://www.mysite.com/name today!

Carlos E. R. wrote:

The Saturday 2004-09-18 at 13:53 -0400, James Knott wrote:

...

...

On a related note, what do you use to backup such beasties? Tapes in mammoth size reels, perhaps? :-)

Just curious.

A *BIG* pile of floppies! ;-)

X'-)

O yea, I remember the backups I made years ago with pcbackup, on a machine with two floppies. It was so fast I barely had time to label the floppies: A, B, A, B, A... there was no need to even press keys, the change was detected.

Around 80 floppies for... 40 Mb? In less than one hour. Some had autochangers... with a CDrom autochangers, big backups would be doable nowdays.

I have two identical 60 G hard drives in my desktop system. One is removable. To backup my system, I just do a full image copy of the entire hard drive, onto the removable one. Important stuff, I also copy onto CD-RW.

If you have that much data, you might want to look at the Sony AIT drives. I think the SAIT drive they announced in the spring held a TB. (or maybe it was a half TB.) Greg On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 15:57:13 -0400, Michael Kershaw wrote:

LOL....We'll it's ashame really!! Seems like they don't feel like spending money on getting our backup system much more efficient!!

We currently have a little over 50TB in house that's just about filled up. Looking to get another 20 pretty shortly I believe. We have (5) Solaris boxes handling our backup duties..(1) Master Server (4) Media Servers. We run Veritas Netbackup Center v4.5 that we're upgrading to v5 shortly. Total of (4) tape silo's. (2) SDK 9710's & (2) SDK 9730's. All have DLT's in them. A total of 18 tape drives among the 4 of them, that we'll be adding another 4 drives to the mix. We still have 2 bays available in the 9710's. The DLT's are actually towards being an end of life product which is also why we're trying to snatch up a few more of them pretty soon.

That of any help?? hehehe

Mike

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 13:05:56 +0200 (CEST), Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

The 2004-09-16 at 13:29 -0400, Michael Kershaw wrote:

...

S***, I wish we only spent 12k for 4TB. We use HDS Storage which is CRAZY expensive! Spent over a mill on 20TB. You want to play with the big boys, your going to need to spend some money....end of story!

On a related note, what do you use to backup such beasties? Tapes in mammoth size reels, perhaps? :-)

Just curious.

-- Cheers, Carlos Robinson

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

Carlos E. R. wrote:

The Saturday 2004-09-18 at 15:57 -0400, Michael Kershaw wrote:

...

LOL....We'll it's ashame really!! Seems like they don't feel like spending money on getting our backup system much more efficient!!

There is always need for more :-)

...

We currently have a little over 50TB in house that's just about filled up. Looking to get another 20 pretty shortly I believe. We have (5) Solaris boxes handling our backup duties..(1) Master Server (4) Media Servers. We run Veritas Netbackup Center v4.5 that we're upgrading to v5 shortly. Total of (4) tape silo's. (2) SDK 9710's & (2) SDK 9730's. All have DLT's in them. A total of 18 tape drives among the 4 of them, that we'll be adding another 4 drives to the mix. We still have 2 bays available in the 9710's. The DLT's are actually towards being an end of life product which is also why we're trying to snatch up a few more of them pretty soon.

That of any help?? hehehe

Kind of :-)

How much can store one of those tapes?

Years ago, for the 8086 there were floppies autchangers: you put a stack of a hundred floppies, and it was automatic. Or you used a tape, that at first was larger than the HD capacity. I wonder if there are tape autochangers, or CDrom autochangers.

Back when I had a 30 MB drive, I used to back it up to floppies. Then when I got my 386, it originally had a 120 MB drive. I used to back it up with one of those QIC-80 drives, attached to the floppy controller. I could generally get a couple of full backups to one tape. Then I got a 540 MB drive and a 2 GB and now that tape drive was no longer so useful. I could have bought another hard drive, for less than the tapes to backup one copy, would cost. As for those huge systems, you can use tape changers or just mirror to a second set of drives, preferably at another location.

Greg Freemyer wrote:

...

I tend to think that optic media is more durable than magnetic media, for long term archiving; teoretically they should not degraded if kept safely. Magnetic fields get weaker in time, I think - but how on earth can a terabyte be saved even in dvds?

For long term storage (15 years) good-quality tape is still the best solution. Optical seems to degrade after a few years, but I'm not sure why. (FYI: the problem is much worse on ones that are burned. The mass-produced pressed ones last longer.)

If you want to store something for 100 years or so, the recommended solution is still micro-fiche (I think).

Or chiselled in stone. ;-) Actually, CD-Rs are durable enough for a business to store its' tax records. Then there's punch cards in Florida. ;-)

Carlos, On Monday 20 September 2004 16:25, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

I read they discovered a bacteria, the biological kind, that eats one of the surfaces or paints.

Also, I read or heard that the paint covering the reflective surface degrades with time, and the rumor said it was designed so on purpose. If that is true, it is evil... huh, i should say unethical. Or commercially clever.

I wouldn't worry about it. In a few billion years, our sun will become a red giant and swell to the point where the Earth's orbit is within the sun's outer atmosphere. At that point, all our data storage media will be pretty much ... toast.

-- Cheers, Carlos Robinson

I'm feelin' cheery. RRS