Florian Rist wrote (2015/05/18): > Thanks for the numbers and pointing me to the spool/unspool problem. > This can be fixed by using two hard drives, right?
In RAID-0? Let's hope so :o) However, I would rather use "better" instead of "fixed". Another solution would be to allow just one parallel job, I'm not sure about your expectations in this way. > The whole thing about costs probably seams to be a bit ridiculous, but > unfortunately there is niter money nor understanding for the need here > right now. So I'm trying to figure out a cheap way to get to a working > system that can be handled somehow. And I'm fully aware of the fact that > the hardware investment costs will be a minor part in the actual long > term overall costs. The question is: Do you really need a tape solution? Isn't better for you to start with disk based solution? For example, some HW RAID card with 8 or 16 internal ports (~ 300 or 500 EUR) with some 2-6 TB HDDs? And you can reuse them after. Tape solutions are very interesting, but they usually count with great number of tape media or with archival purposes or data exchange. -- Rudolf Cejka <cejkar at fit.vutbr.cz> http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/~cejkar Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Information Technology Bozetechova 2, 612 66 Brno, Czech Republic ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
