LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  June 2005

ARSCLIST June 2005

Subject:

Re: Longevity of data tape?--

From:

Jeffrey Kane <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 9 Jun 2005 21:56:18 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (126 lines)

I specifically was referring to DAT. As an amateur, I only have very limited
experience with ADAT and none with DTRS or DASH. I have personal experience
with DAT, LTO, AIT and DLT used for data archival. The principle applies to
all of the above unless my understanding is mistaken.

As an example; say a track is archived to both DASH and LTO. After six
years, both are pulled out to restore the material (remastering, what have
you). For whatever reason (environmental problems, magnetic field exposure,
handling damage, oxide shedding, etc) both tapes are damaged and 5 feet of
tape is rendered useless. In the case of the DASH reel, only the material
contained in that segment of tape will be lost, the rest can be recovered.
In the case of the LTO tape, whatever file that section of tape contained is
lost in it's entirety. Were the LTO tape to contain separate files
representing the tracks on the DASH master, one entire track would be lost
as that file written to the area now damaged cannot easily be reconstructed
(or not at all if the material were compressed, encrypted, or both). Were
the LTO to contain one large file containing the separate tracks (say a Pro
Tools Macintosh Stuffit archive, necessary to preserve resource forks), the
entire project would be lost.

Obviously exceptions exist. I maintain that data archiving methods offer
greater data resilience; digital audio storage methods suffer less data loss
when damage results in unrecoverable errors.



-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Spencer
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 8:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity of data tape?--

Jeff,

I was curious if you could elaborate further on your initial post:

  "With digital audio tape the error only affects that portion of the
recording"

Which format of digital audio tape are you referring to?  R-DAT/
DASH/ PD?

Were you stating that you prefer digital audio tape formats to
Enterprise-class data storage tapes?

John
John Spencer
www.bridgemediasolutions.com


On Jun 9, 2005, at 4:52 PM, Jeffrey Kane wrote:

> I don't believe I explained myself properly. Most backup
> applications will
> skip a bad block (or even several blocks) of data and continue the
> restore.
> What I describe arises when the corruption exceeds the ability of the
> software to recover from errors. In that case, an entire file (or
> several if
> not the whole tape depending on the location of the error) will be
> rendered
> unrecoverable. The validation of the archive/backup at the time
> only ensures
> the initial process succeded. The problematic variable is between
> archival
> and retrieval. With digital audio recordings, such errors will only
> render
> that portion of the recording unrecoverable.
>
> As for error correction, that is a function of the format (AIT/LTO/
> DLT/etc)
> and software used for backup/archival. On 'trusting' a datatape to be
> readable 25-30 years from now; I completely agree. That is the
> figure I
> recall being used when discussing longevity. In my case, I re-archive
> critical material every three years. Data on tape IMO is far too
> susceptible
> to corruption to be relied upon for a longer timeframe than that.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Spencer
>> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 2:47 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity of data tape?--
>>
>> This is an incorrect statement.  There are various backup
>> applications that will skip a bad block of data and continue
>> the restore process, as well as applications that will report
>> on the quality of the data archive as it is being written.
>> Error correction is not a function of the data storage tape itself.
>>
>> And I would never trust a data storage tape to be readable
>> 25-30 years from now.
>>
>> John
>> John Spencer
>> www.bridgemediasolutions.com
>>
>>
>> On Jun 9, 2005, at 2:36 PM, Jeffrey Kane wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I've seen the figure 25-30 years bandied about for data tape. Data
>>> backups are a double edge sword. They have better error
>>>
>> correction so
>>
>>> the data is more resilient. However, if there's an
>>>
>> unrecoverable error
>>
>>> it renders ALL data for that particular file (and if it's in the
>>> directory area, all data on the tape) unrecoverable. With digital
>>> audio tape the error only affects that portion of the recording.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager