Backup and Tape device answers

[AMT]

Roy,
Sounds like you had the same problem as I did.. after restoring the first file, the output will keep repeating something like "brufilter: Reading archive..." until it finds the next file. It'll eventually get there, but the speed at which it is reading makes me think the tape drive can't seek forward to different positions.

The drive is an HP Ultrium LTO4 drive, for what it's worth..

 

[Roy Pearson]

Roy,
Sounds like you had the same problem as I did.. after restoring the first file, the output will keep repeating something like "brufilter: Reading archive..." until it finds the next file. It'll eventually get there, but the speed at which it is reading makes me think the tape drive can't seek forward to different positions.

The drive is an HP Ultrium LTO4 drive, for what it's worth..

Yep, HP 1760 here. My solution at the time was just to perform separate restore operations, and I haven't run into the situation since then. Not a big problem for me, but I could see it being annoying for someone who frequently restores individual files.

 

[Scott Brown]

Hi folks

We've been using hard drives as a backup solution for several years and until recently we've never had a problem. However, we lost two drives in the space of two weeks and got our fingers badly burned so now we're starting to take our backup rather more seriously :cryin:

Stage one - we've installed a new raid 6 array for our edit suite (Proavio box with HighPoint Rocket Raid which gives us 600+ MB/s read & write. Raid 6 allows us to lose two drives and survive.

Stage two - we've installed a Drobo Pro with 8 x 2TB drives in raid 6 configuration and this gives us around 10 TB of backup space. This is connected to our edit suite via Gig E and is set to backup our current video footage overnight.

Now I'm already starting to sleep better at night :thumbup:

The next phase is to set up a backup system for offsite storage and for long term archive.

After lots of research I've come to the conclusion that the only viable solution is to use LTO tape and hence I've been going through the posts in this thread in great detail.

I've decided on LTO 5 as we really need the larger capacity and I'm looking at two products for this, one is the HP Ultrium 3000 unit and the other is the Cache A solution. I've spoken to a few resellers and they're all trying hard to sell the benefits of the Cache A systems to me but they range from 2 to 3 times the price of the stand alone HP drive. Is the Cache A product worth the extra money? Anyone care to chime in here?

I realise that we'll need software to control the LTO unit and I like the sound of BRU PE. I also require software for logging our footage so we can start to build up a database of what we have shot over the years. To this end can anyone make a recommendation?

I've looked at FCP Server but hardly anyone seems to be using this and I question Apple's dedication to the future of its Pro Apps division. Another software solution I've looked at is CAT DV - this seems to get decent reviews but again, anyone got real world experience of using this?

Thank everyone, any help and advice would be much appreciated.

Best wishes

Scott

 

[Tom Goldberg]

Hi Scott,

Not to displace answers from other Red users, but I thought I'd jump in and say a few words in response to your inquiry about the extra cost of a Cache-A (from the manufacturer's point of view).

It is true that a raw LTO drive is 1/3rd the cost of one of our complete archiving appliances. It is also true that you can assemble all the components yourself, install Bru and have an archival solution.

What we offer is a complete solution that requires no assembly, no maintenance, comes with all the software and full support, and provides archival tapes that can be read on any computer that supports tar.

I have a white paper going into this comparison in some detail and would invite you to download a copy from our web site: http://www.cache-a.com/paperform.php

Good luck with your decision - whatever way you go, I can assure you that you are correct in your realization that LTO is far safer than hard disks on the shelf.

Best,
Tom

 

[Scott Brown]

Hi Tom

Many thanks for your kind reply to my post and I'll go ahead and download the white paper from your site as suggested.

I'm very impressed with your products and their exceptionally well thought out workflow. The ability to simply connect to a network out of the box via Gig E is wonderful and having looked at your web site it's clear that you have an excellent understanding of the needs of the film and broadcast video industries.

For us as a small production company, the issue is cost. The basic LTO 5 drive/BRU PE option will in theory get the job done, albeit with a lot less elegance. That said I can see us moving up to one of your systems as soon as budget allows.

Do you have any plans to offer a more basic, lower cost starter option in your range? For me the sweet spot in price terms is somewhere around the $7000 mark. The only LTO 5 option your offer so far has been quoted to us at approximately $12000.

Thanks again for your reply Tom and please do give consideration to a lower end option for smaller companies, you'll make less profit per unit but volume sales should make this worthwhile without impacting your higher end solutions.

Best wishes

Scott

 

[James Press]

Hi Tim and all,

Excuse my ignorance, and if this is explained somewhere:

In relation to LTO4, what is best practice for replacing/duplicating LTO4 tapes that have been written to once and then archived in archive-optimised storage (low humidity; steady temperature etc) environment? I know the published statistic on the shelf-life of LTO4 is around 30 years, and I've heard some say duplication should be considered after 5 years; but what is a sensible balance here? Obviously if cost was no option then the 5 year replacement would (statistically) make sense; but what are most organisations doing in the world?

Any thoughts much appreciated.

EDIT: Torrey's whitepaper answered this: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=46932

 

[Maciej Roszkowski]

Has anyone used the Tape Import beta that Tim offered yet ?
I'm trying to deal with BRU support right now to get it.

The feature is still listed in the product PDF and it's something I had in BRU LE and even retrospect. I had a data loss and no way to access my tapes through the GUI. Dumping multiple LTO 4 tapes to access single files is a poor solution plus a major time sink for someone like me who does not live in the command line.

Tim if you are reading, you mention that "We were originally working to incorporate an import function within the PE interface when a prominent user asked if it could be a standalone tool." Given the option I would love to have this as part of the standard software since it's a core feature I'd love to have at my fingertips. It would also enable us to work with other production facilities to work with LTO media like removable media. I don't see the problem with an additional tool for people that for some reason want to run a separate application. (I am lacking the imagination at the moment why someone would want this, but usually people have their workflow reasons).

I find dealing with tape, even modern tape, brings me back to the 1980's of computing when it comes to the user experience. It's a task I'd like to hand off to junior people but can't right now due to complexity. Having a unified application (which I hoped PE would be based on the Import Tool statement in the product PDF) would make training staff on it easier.

 

[Chris Parker]

Two questions:

1. Is BRU 2.1 a go for production use? Is it solid enough to be used on important backup jobs? Is the new BRUsetta Stone feature all you need to reaccess the archive at a later date?

2. What is the most efficient way to get TWO LTO tapes done for a job. We have lots of clients now who want 2 tapes that are the same, and I was wondering if it is better to use an autoloader and do them in succession, or if there is an efficient way to do BOTH tapes archiving the same group of files? Please explain.

Thanks....

 

[Oliver Peng]

I learned a ton reading and re-reading through this thread! I still have a few questions.

I notice that LTO drives do not have drivers and are dependent on back up software to run them (BRU PE, Symantec Backup Exec, HP has something, etc.) I really like the idea of using BRU PE some time down the line, but I currently only own a PC workstation (and macbook pro's). I'd like to be able to start backing up now to LTO since going down the path of HDs seems unwieldy and a slippery slope. Which means, I'll likely use one of the software packages that come bundled with Tandberg Data or HP's drives. Tandberg Data bundles Symantec Backup Exec, and HP bundles HP Data Protector Express... neither of which I'm sure will run on Windows 7..?

Anyways, my question boils down to, how well do LTO tapes written by different softwares interoperate? Do tapes written with Bru Pe require Bru Pe to read them? If I start backing up data now using Windows software, will Bru Pe be able to read them down the line when I get a Mac Pro?

Lastly, I know it's been glossed over before, but can someone suggest a windows software package for writing LTO that's cost effective? I know there are lots of choices, but they all seem geared towards IT related tasks. I haven't looked at them in depth, but if anyone's had experience with LTO on Windows, I'd love to get some feedback!

 

[Tom Goldberg]

... my question boils down to, how well do LTO tapes written by different softwares interoperate?

All of the backup solutions you mention (BRU PE, Symantec Backup Exec, HP, etc.) write in proprietary formats. To get interoperability you need something that writes in some kind of standard format, which is either tar (the 30+ year-old Unix standard) or the new LTFS standard.

Lastly, I know it's been glossed over before, but can someone suggest a windows software package for writing LTO that's cost effective?

You can find a tar compatible low-cost windows solution by googling Amanda/Zmanda. You can also explore the emerging open-sourced LTFS solutions from IBM and HP for LTO-5 - these are brand new and not yet widely deployed, but IMHO are destined to become the LTO tape interchange standard of the future.

Of course, my admittedly biased view is that if computers aren't your hobby, by the time you sort out the possibilities, acquire all the bits and pieces, install, test, and deploy your solution, you will have invested many hours and might be better off just buying our cross-platform appliance. Our system does all that for you with a bunch of other benefits, writes in tar and will support LTFS in the future. For more info about this, please take a look at our white paper here.

 

[WAW Parker]

Hello everyone!

I love reading this thread, but haven't found the answer I'm looking/hoping for. Please let me know if this has been answered before.

I have an HP StorageWorks Ultrium 1760 SAS that my employer handed me and asked me to "make it work." Can/should this be connected to the Fibre Channel ports on the back of the Mac Pro? The Mac Pro already has the Apple Fibre Channel PCI Express card already installed. Are the other solutions that other people are talking about on this thread cheaper and/or better?

I also know that I'll need software to make it work. Retrospect or Tollisgroup BRU or something like that...

Also, on a side note, the Ultrium 1760 looks like a rack mountable version and might need a case to go around it...?

Thank you in advance for your help

 

[Tim Jones]

SAS != Fibre-Channel

SAS != Fibre-Channel

I have an HP StorageWorks Ultrium 1760 SAS that my employer handed me and asked me to "make it work." Can/should this be connected to the Fibre Channel ports on the back of the Mac Pro? The Mac Pro already has the Apple Fibre Channel PCI Express card already installed. Are the other solutions that other people are talking about on this thread cheaper and/or better?

SAS is not Fibre-Channel, so you'll need a SAS card. The ATTO family is the only thing that works with OS X and Tape.

I also know that I'll need software to make it work. Retrospect or Tollisgroup BRU or something like that...

Of course, I'll recommend TOLIS Group's BRU PE :wink:

Also, on a side note, the Ultrium 1760 looks like a rack mountable version and might need a case to go around it...?

You mean that it's simply an internal drive? In that case, it will definitely need a chassis. Because it's SAS, your options will be limited. HP has a rack mount 1U chassis that can be used, but we've not found a useable external desktop SAS chassis.

HTH,

 

[David Barlow]

Hi Tim,

I am sorry. I am sure that I have read this information before but I cannot find so perhaps I can ask again.

1. What percentage (roughly) should we add to our data to allow for the cataloging overhead when writing to tape with BRU (LE)? I have been allowing 15%.

2. When the program estimates the archive size does that include all the overheads? The estimate and the reading of total data written at the end of the recording can often be different (larger) than the figure given for the archive size if you bring it up in the restore window.

3 Should we be able to expect a full 800GB of data on an LTO-4 tape (including any overhead) when recording quicktime movies or R3D files to a BRU archive? My memory was that the overhead was around 15% so I do not usually try to record more than 680GB of my data to a tape. I have never had a problem with this. However, I have just had a batch of Maxell tapes and the tape deck is asking for a new tape after a total of 670Gb of data have been written on an archive that estimated a total of 709GB at the start. Are these tapes undersized or is this normal?

Thanks for any insights,

David

 

[Marcus Struzina]

Hi Tim

Just wondering if there is any practical way to connect drives like the Tandberg Data LTO-4 HH External Tape Drive to a Macbook Pro ?

 

[Tim Jones]

LTO and Laptops

LTO and Laptops

Just wondering if there is any practical way to connect drives like the Tandberg Data LTO-4 HH External Tape Drive to a Macbook Pro ?

If you have a SCSI LTO-4 drive, one option suggested was to use either an ATTO IPBridge 1550 or a Paralan iS520A iSCSI to SCSI device and run a point to point ethernet cable between your MBP and the iSCSI bridge device to use the tape drive as an iSCSI target. However, the cost of doing that gets very expensive if you're already hitting your budget ceiling. Because 1GbE does provide a solid 100MB/sec of data throughput in this scenario, you would be able to stream a SCSI LTO-4 drive.

Otherwise, your only option is a USB DAT or non-direct connect solution like the Cache-A devices. Even with the launch of Thunderbolt, there's no mechanism for connecting any type of tape device and cursory discussions with HP, IBM, Tandberg, and Quantum indicate that there's no work being done in that area at this time.

One future option is with SONNeT Technology's pending Thunderbolt Echo Express PCIe sidecar (near the bottom of the page) and a SAS Express/34 card (no details available), but neither of these will be available before the end of the Summer.

Also, if you do have the budget for an iSCSI bridge (you also must pay for the iSCSI initiator software for your Mac), BRU PE and BRU Server have been tested with the ATTO and Paralan solutions. As with everything ATTO, we saw better performance with the ATTO device and iSCSI initiator software. The ATTO iSCSI software also works with the Paralan device. Note that the current release of the GlobalSAN iSCSI software did not like dealing with tape.

As an aside, be aware that LTO-5 is not currently available in parallel SCSI, so there's no way to get LTO-5 connectivity using iSCSI until someone comes up with an iSCSI to SAS bridge.

HTH

 

[Marcus Struzina]

Thanks Tim,

Looks like waiting a while till thunderbolt is better supported might be the way to go. Weird that all the solutions seem complicated, looks like a business
opportunity in a simplified affordable mac compatible hardware/software package, as stacks of people must be generating terabytes of data needing long term storage.

 

[Matt Pope]

Looks like it's been about 6 months since the last post in here, so hopefully somebody'll see this...

I've been running Bru PE for a year and a half or so on a single machine small company type of setup. For the most part I've been pretty happy, although I've definitely run into some bugs and issues along the way. Until now I've always been able to get great support by filing a ticket if needed. But I've got an issue now where I can't restore from a particular archive and when I filed a ticket with support I got a message about not having a support contract and the ticket was closed. I'm not sure exactly how much a support contract costs but I'm guessing for my small business and the dozen or so tapes we'll back up in a given year it's probably more pricey than we can justify.

Anyway, the current issue is that I tried to restore some files out of an archive recently and wasn't able to. More specifically, when I went into the archive contents (which looked normal) if I double-click any file or folder in the archive to choose to restore it, it will show it down in the restore window at the bottom, but the mouse then turns into a little clock. More importantly, in the info in the restore window below, there's missing information - there's no "Offset", "On Vol", or "Set Name" listed.

When I then click to restore it, it pops up a window telling me it needs me to insert tape set "". I can put in the tape I know to be the correct tape, but it doesn't work.

This only happens when I try to restore files from that single archive. I can restore from any other archive on the same tape without a problem. What's more, I always make a duplicate backup of each tape. The duplicate archive on the duplicate tape does the exact same thing. Again, all of the information about the archive seems to be just fine when I browse through it in the Bru window, it just chokes when I try to restore from it.

This isn't good, as the two backup tapes are the only copies of the archived project we're trying to access.

I'm hoping someone has an idea of how to help! Or even a way to just dump the whole tape to disk or something so that I can completely start over on those archives and just cross my fingers that it never happens again.

Thanks!

(BTS, this is using an HP 1760 connected via Atto H380 to a Mac Pro...)

 

[Tim Jones]

BRU Will always restore ...

BRU Will always restore ...

Matt,

• First and foremost, BRU will restore your data. However, the UI's we provide do depend on the catalog and tape information stored within the UI's operating environment - whether BRU PE, BRU LE, or BRU Server. In your case, it appears that elements of your catalog and tape information have become corrupt. Because the UI's view into your catalogs has become confused does not affect the validity of the data stored on your tapes, and BRU can always restore the data from those tapes.

• Second, the REDuser forums should not be used as a replacement for TOLIS Group Technical support and I don't want posts like this causing site management to disable my posting ability.

To restore your data, the first step that I would recommend is that you update your BRU PE installation to BRU PE 2.3.1. It's a free update for all registered BRU PE users - regardless of support status. Within the update, you will find the BRU PE Import Tool application that will allow you to import the catalogs off of your tapes very easily. Once you've imported these tapes, you should be able to restore your data as expected from within the UI. If, however, something is very broken for some reason, all that you need to do is contact our support team and they will help you restore the data.

I'll repeat - regardless of the status of your BRU PE UI's catalog environment, the data on your BRU tapes is intact and can be restored.

 

[Tim Jones]

Thunderbolt still pending ...

Thunderbolt still pending ...

Looks like waiting a while till thunderbolt is better supported might be the way to go. Weird that all the solutions seem complicated, looks like a business opportunity in a simplified affordable mac compatible hardware/software package, as stacks of people must be generating terabytes of data needing long term storage.

Hi Marcus and everyone - we're still tapping our toes impatiently waiting for the release of Thunderbolt connectivity products. It looks as if both ATTO Technology and Sonnet Tech are working on solutions for the new year, but we've still not seen the promised engineering samples. As soon as we get more concrete information on a release date and product capabilities, I'll be starting a new thread with product information.

 

[Michael Kromschroeder]

Tim, as a almost customer of BRU I think it is not your choice to tell us where to post and where not.
REDuser is a platform to post experience and personal opinions.

For me it has a lot of value to here the experience of Matt and it helps me to avoid problems by not having a support contract.

I am going to wire you the money for BRU this week.