Re: Un-attended Large Archives (fwd)

In <1993May7.170839.21985@news.uiowa.edu> dshirazi@labyrnth.uhl.uiowa.edu (Dariush Shirazi) writes: >Graeme Sargent (graeme@pyra.co.uk) wrote: >What dave basically said was that changing the check point interval can >help reduce this problem. If you have other needs (I could not tell from >your original posting that you had a time recovery criteria), there are >other solutions. >How about buying a 5 gig tape drive. If that is too small, buy a jude box >that can go to 100 gig. Yes... The same old story. throwing money at things, >usually solve the problem. A typical large Pyramid site will have 4-8 5GB tape drives configured as one logical array, but that only gives me 15-35Gb unattended (one drive is used as parity, to protect against tape media failure). I can support ~120Gb of database (although admittedly no-one is running OnLine that large yet). Unfortunately, prospects with $0.5m to spend on a jude (sic) box are few and far between, and have you ever thought about the problems of integrating OnLine with a juke box's tape library management software? graeme -- Disclaimer: The author's opinions are his own, and not necessarily those of Pyramid Technology Ltd. or Pyramid Technology Inc. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -m------- Graeme Sargent Voice: +44 (0)252 373035 ---mmm----- Senior Database Consultant Fax : +44 (0)252 373135 -----mmmmm--- Pyramid Technology Ltd. Telex: Tell who??? -------mmmmmmm- Farnborough, Hants GU14 7PL Email: graeme@uk.pyramid.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the technology. The tricky bit is learning how to use it.