Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!rochester!ur-tut!ur-valhalla!moscom!jgp
From: jgp@moscom.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.sources.wanted
Subject: Re: Backup Utilities for Unix
Message-ID: <973@moscom.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 7-May-87 01:26:22 EDT
Article-I.D.: moscom.973
Posted: Thu May  7 01:26:22 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 8-May-87 05:34:37 EDT
References: <1308@ci-dandelion.UUCP> <4360@videovax.Tek.COM> <1422@ho95e.ATT.COM> <353@mtxinu.UUCP>
Reply-To: jgp@moscom.UUCP (Jim Prescott)
Organization: MOSCOM Corp, E. Rochester, NY
Lines: 25
Keywords: system management backups dump restore
Xref: utgpu comp.unix.questions:1944 comp.sources.wanted:992

There are at least two companies (Exabyte and Honeywell) offering tape
systems with > 2000 Mb storage per tape (using normal video tape).  How
will systems like these affect current backup practices?

	Since entire filesystems will fit on a single tape, doing
	full dumps instead of incrementals becomes more attractive.

	While dumps and tars will still need time to run (to traverse
	the filesystem) a dd image could be nice and quick.  Awkward
	to restore individual files from but nice protection against
	head crashes ("System pausing for 10 minutes for disk check-
	pointing, please stand by.").

	It is a lot less work to do the full dump, mkfs, full restore
	procedure to optimize disk performance with a single tape,
	especially if you want to have more than one copy of your
	full dump before you do the mkfs.  Of course more optimized
	disks allows for faster full dumps too.

Anybody else have any comments?  I'd be especially interested in
hearing from anybody who has actually used one of these systems.
The ads and glossies make them sound great but thats what ads and
glossies are for.
-- 
Jim Prescott	rochester!moscom!jgp