AIT-3 ?

any experience with AIT-3 tape ?

In article ers.com,
says...

any experience with AIT-3 tape ?


with it's MemoryInCassette technology making the average "time to data"
an amazing 17 seconds (if my memory serves me correctly) it's great for
near line storage in a single drive tabletop configuration

for library type applications it's not so great both capacity / performance
or durability wise

_____ . .
' \\ . . |
O// . . |
\_\ . . |
| | . . . |
/ | . www.EvenEnterprises.com . . . |
/ .| . . . |
/ . | 310-544-9439 / 310-544-9309 fax . . . o
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized - DIRECT VAR/VAD/Distributor for new SCSI/FC-AL peripherals
NAS/SAN/RAID from HP, IBM, Seagate, EMC, QLogic, ATL, OverLand Data

Please name an application (HSM, backup or otherwise) that uses MIC. I'm
not saying that time to data for AIT isn't reasonably good, but to my
knowledge MIC is a little like a gall bladder at this point...


with it's MemoryInCassette technology making the average "time to data"
an amazing 17 seconds (if my memory serves me correctly) it's great for
near line storage in a single drive tabletop configuration

for library type applications it's not so great both capacity /
performance
or durability wise

thanks for the info

why do you say it is not great for performance or durability for library
applications ?



with it's MemoryInCassette technology making the average "time to data"
an amazing 17 seconds (if my memory serves me correctly) it's great for
near line storage in a single drive tabletop configuration

for library type applications it's not so great both capacity /
performance
or durability wise

why is the MIC not used then ?


Please name an application (HSM, backup or otherwise) that uses MIC. I'm
not saying that time to data for AIT isn't reasonably good, but to my
knowledge MIC is a little like a gall bladder at this point...


with it's MemoryInCassette technology making the average "time to data"
an amazing 17 seconds (if my memory serves me correctly) it's great for
near line storage in a single drive tabletop configuration

for library type applications it's not so great both capacity /
performance
or durability wise

Don't mean to speak for Andy, but it's unproven in data center apps. This
is highly debatable, but some think that helical scan type drives heads wear
more quickly than linear type. Performance-wise, AIT-3 is easily
outstripped by LTO-2 and SDLT technologies.

MIC is one of those things that's a great idea, but not generally
implemented in software. Most software companies shy away from writing apps
for specific hardware.

--paul

"Null" wrote in message
news
thanks for the info

why do you say it is not great for performance or durability for library
applications ?



with it's MemoryInCassette technology making the average "time to data"
an amazing 17 seconds (if my memory serves me correctly) it's great for
near line storage in a single drive tabletop configuration

for library type applications it's not so great both capacity /
performance
or durability wise

"Null" wrote in message
. rogers.com...
why is the MIC not used then ?


Because there's no universally accepted way of using the AIT MIC and it's
poorly documented. Legato can write entirely incompatible information to it
when compared to Veritas, TSM, or any other package. For most software
vendors it's yet another piece of information they would need to track,
support and check. With the market share for AIT, most software vendors
simply don't bother investing the time and resources to make use of the MIC.

Rob

"Andy" wrote in message
news:yMQrb.7029$Cj1.6697@fed1read07...

with it's MemoryInCassette technology making the average "time to data"
an amazing 17 seconds (if my memory serves me correctly) it's great for
near line storage in a single drive tabletop configuration

for library type applications it's not so great both capacity /
performance
or durability wise


Accellerators like MIC only makes sense in environments where a lot of
loading/unloading and searching takes place. The impact of saving 10 or 20
seconds access time is negligable on a device that's best suitable for a
stand-alone environment where an operator would insert a tape no more than
once every two hours.

Rob