Tape backup vs. removable hard drive

Question

We're buying a new PowerEdge server, and I'm trying to justify the cost of a tape backup vs. a couple of removable hard drives.  Seems like tape backups are dinosaurs from an era long ago like mainframes and COBOL.  But maybe I'm missing something, and I was hoping the Tape Backup forum could enlighten me.   On the plus side, tapes are physically smaller and more resistant to data loss via heat, dropping, etc., thus making offsite storage easier and more reliable.   On the down side, tape backups aren't near our drive capacity unless they're compressed.  Second, tapes are almost as expensive as hard drives per GB, and are more expensive when you factor in a $1,500-$3,000 tape drive compared to a $30 USB hard drive case.  Third, they're agonizingly slow.   Can anyone tell me why I should spend thousands of dollars on a tape backup compared to a few hundred on removable hard drives?   --Bennett

DELL-Bob D · Answer

Seems like tape backups are dinosaurs from an era long ago like mainframes and COBOL.    These aren't your fathers tape drives!!!! Tape has come a long way in the past 5 years. Yes there are still low-end slow drives out there but the same can be said for H/D's.   LTO has taken tape to the next level. With introductory speeds of 15MB/sec native and 30MB/sec compressed and capacities of 100GB/200GB and that was generation 1 a couple of years ago! Gen2 doubled the speeds 30MB/sec native and 200GB native capacity, Gen3 is somewhere around 70MB/sec.   SDLT is another tape technology with amazing speeds and capacity.   Yes these drives do require an initial upfront investment but over the years you will not get a cheaper $ to MB solution. That is why tape still exists.   thus making offsite storage easier and more reliable.   And isn't that what you want out of a backup solution...reliability. No point in storing data unless you can get it back....and after a catastophic failure is not the time to find out your solution doesn't work.   Good luck with your search and give tape a little closer look!

BennTech · Answer

I've been pricing these things out for 100GB-200GB (we could do with a 36GB now, but our office is starting to scan in all documents and our space requirements are about to skyrocket). Seems tapes are about 25% cheaper than HDs, costing about $.45/GB and $.60/GB respectively.

25% is quite a bit if you're talking dozens of tapes. For our office, though, I think we can get by with about 6, and maybe up to 15 when we get rolling. So here's the breakdown for us using 200GB (native):

TAPES:

Tape drive = $3000
Tapes = 6 * $90 = $540 or 15 * $90 = $1350
Total = $3540 to $4350

HDS:

Removable SATA: $40 (SATA card) + $40 (hot-swap SATA case) + 4 * $30 (extra case cartridge) = $200
HDs = 6 * $120 = $720 or 15 * $120 = $1800
Total = $920 to $2000

So, for us, tapes cost about twice to quadruple as much as tapes. Ouch! In fact, using this model, the breakeven isn't until you need 100 tapes or HDs. That's more than the majority of users--small offices--will ever use.

Thank for the input, Bob, but I think I've decided to skip the tape backup on our new server and just use removable HDs.

--Bennett

DELL-Bob D · Answer

You obviously have done a more extensive search than I on these disks because I can't find a 200GB drive for less than $200.   I did find LTO2 media for under $50.   Good luck to you with your solution.

BennTech · Answer

Wow, I haven't found LTO2 that cheap, but even at $.25/GB, the initial cost of the tape drive is still the killer.   The tape backup on our old server went out a month ago (sweet 6-tape changer that nearly doubled the price of our server), and that's another consideration.  Comparatively, hard drives are cheaper to replace if they fail.  Of course, tapes are still the cheapest to replace, but you still need the tape drive to use a tape.  ;-)

dba7dba · Answer

Hi,
From what I read here, it seems like you are simply planning on keeping the backup media in your office? Were you planning on keeping at least 1 removable HD at your home for offsite storage?
Being able to keep backup media offsite (using Iron mountain or similar services) should be considered in your plan. If the office burns down (unlikely but could happen and that's what backup is for...) all your work for backup is gone...

I remember reading an article stating that almost half of small business that were based in one of the World Trade Centers in NY went out of business within 1 year after a car bomb went off in the basement. Think this happened in the 90's. Even though offices in the building themselves were not damaged, access to them was restricted for awhile, preventing people from retrieving their data. This in turn caused many small bisinesses without offsite backup plan to go out of business.

my 2c.

BennTech · Answer

My plan is to have 1 drive rotated offsite, assuming the office staff remembers to take a drive home every week and remembers to bring it back (I'm just contract help, not full-time). We'll see how that goes. :-) If they follow the plan, then worst case is that they loose 1 week's work.

Another client I have is ultra-paranoid about data backup, and is concerned about the whole building-burning-down issue. But he wants more than just data backup--he wants to be able to continue working from an office-site server like nothing happened.

I think that's a bit overkill, but it's his money. So I'm working on setting up a server cluster between his office and at his house (VPN, of course), with the house functioning as a backup only. Wish me luck--I'm a bright guy (if I do say so myself), but I've never setup a cluster or even DFS. And even if I can get that setup successfully, I don't know how well it's going to work over DSL. If it does work, I might suggest this setup to my other clients.

PowerVault

Tape backup vs. removable hard drive

Was this post helpful?