Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 12:03:40 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@trout.sri.MT.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@ref.tfs.com>, terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Cc: obrien@leonardo.net, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Compress dumps? Message-ID: <199505011803.MAA01024@trout.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@ref.tfs.com> "Re: Compress dumps?" (May 1, 10:49am)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I always want to cry when someone suggests stream compression on > > dump formats. > > Terry, > > In my 10+ years in computing, I have >once< had a chance to restore > from a damaged media which were still partially readable. In my 10+ years in computing, I have had *multiple chances (experiences) trying to resurrect a dump from damaged media. I can count on the my fingers the # of restores I've had to do which were bad, but it's not an experience I'd go through again if I had a choice. > Comparing that to how many tapes I've written, streams based compression > is a very low risk thing to do to save money. Compared to how many tapes I've written and how many went bad, I would *NEVER* do stream based compression. Note, my experience has been that the failure rate is not very high, but for the cost of a few tapes the cost of *my* time to get the backup (if possible) and the cost of lost work of the developers it isn't an issue. > How about this observation btw: > > If I can compress at least 3:1, I can make two copies, and still save > 33% on media... (Assuming you fill them of course). The price of backup media has never been an issue for me. If price is an issue for you, then rotate your tapes. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199505011803.MAA01024>