🚀 go-pugleaf

Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > People keep mentioning the good track record of DAT, but the only concrete
> > examples I have heard are things like, "worked OK for 1 year, then stopped
> > recording", and even "worked OK for a week, then started to fail on
> > recovering tapes, after sending the drive back and forth for replacements
> > and repairs many times, we gave up and got a DLT".
> Keep in mind that satisfied linux users don't post to Usenet
> "my linux box's been working perfectly since 1.0.9" messages
> -- they usually post when something goes wrong.  Are you sure
> this isn't the case with the things you hear about DAT?
I worked with a supercomputing project for a while; we found that MTBFs
for both DRAM and our 8mm DAT drives were accurate...just make sure to
factor the "5% usage" expectation into your 30k hour MTBF on the tape
drive to get the actual mean hours of operation between failures. 
Sometimes cleaning the drives would help, sometimes sending them back
for repair (where they allegedly just cleaned them again) helped...

	Keith

-- 
Q: What's more dangerous than a room full of angry Narns?
A: One angry Centauri backing them, who has bribed your guards...