|
|
|
|
|
by at_a_remove
1839 days ago
|
|
I didn't know -- or perhaps remember -- that you had to match the feed against the speed, sort of like the way you had to be very careful about burning CD-Rs in the old days, but that makes perfect sense. I have been fearfully realizing that I will soon need tape backup for my next project and this is helpful. Now I am wondering if a RAID 0 of multiple HDDs could provide the ~300 MB/s speed needed. |
|
Sending the data fast enough to the drive will reduce both the total time required for backup, when the drive is active, and it will also avoid starting and stopping a lot the drive during the transfer.
Both eliminating the start-stop cycles and reducing the total active time will increase the life of your tape drive.
On my server I have 128 GB of DRAM, which makes it extremely easy to ensure maximum speed without wearing a SSD.
When the backup starts, I create an 80-GB RAM disk, larger than the up to 60 GB archives in which I collect the files sent to backup.
With less memory one could either use smaller chunks or use a SSD instead of the RAM disk, but that seems wasteful.
Then the archive files are buffered in the RAM disk and written in one command, without pauses.