Comments on: NetWorker and linuxvtl, Redux

By: Holiday Wrap-Up « The NetWorker Blog

Holiday Wrap-Up « The NetWorker Blog — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 02:48:21 +0000

[...] 5 – “NetWorker and linuxvtl, Redux“. The open source LinuxVTL project continues to grow and develop. While it’s not suited [...]

By: Otmanix

Otmanix — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:51:54 +0000

I have written a complete step by step howto for MHVTL virtual tape library with Networker server 7.6 on OpenSUSE 11.2 (in a Virtualbox VM). Maybe someone find this useful: http://otmanix.de/english/2010/08/18/networker-and-mhvtl-in-a-virtualbox-vm-part1/
Kind regards, Otmanix

By: linux vtl « Esatea Blog | Self Learning

linux vtl « Esatea Blog | Self Learning — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 01:24:36 +0000

[...] Also a follow up article http://nsrd.info/blog/2009/11/14/networker-and-linuxvtl-redux/ [...]

By: Otmanix' Blog » Open Source VTL auf Linux – getestet mit Networker

Otmanix' Blog » Open Source VTL auf Linux – getestet mit Networker — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:54:23 +0000

[...] Networker Blog von Preston de Guise bin ich hier und hier auf eine höchst interessante Open Source Software gestoßen. MHVTL ist eine Virtual Tape [...]

By: Carry a jukebox with you (if you’re using Linux) « The NetWorker Blog

Carry a jukebox with you (if you’re using Linux) « The NetWorker Blog — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:44:29 +0000

[...] here for an update article covering multiple drive support, now that Mark has this working in a way which is compatible with [...]

By: The top 10 for 2009 « The NetWorker Blog

The top 10 for 2009 « The NetWorker Blog — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:42:04 +0000

[...] for others: Even Mark himself says that the open source VTL shouldn’t be used for production backups. Don’t be cheap with your backup system, this is an excellent tool for lab setups, training, [...]

By: November’s top article « NetWorker Blog

November’s top article « NetWorker Blog — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:19:26 +0000

[...] testing purposes, I’d also recommend reading the follow-up article I wrote this month, “NetWorker and LinuxVTL, redux“, which details recent advances Mark Harvey made in the code to allow NetWorker to use [...]

By: Mark Harvey

Mark Harvey — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:15:55 +0000

At the moment, I would not use the vtl for production use.

The ‘back-end’ storage format is implemented as a simple on disk double-linked-list.

I make NO guarantees to keep tape format consistent between releases. Although it has only changed about 3 times in total of 4years.

The backend storage is being reworked to provide a more efficient (performance wise) format.

One of the problems seen (when specifying larger media sizes) include SCSI timeouts during seeking (space).
Also, the current linear ‘walk-double-linked-list’ does have a negative impact on the page cache.

By: Preston

Preston — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:59:41 +0000

While I have the greatest respect for the developer, I can’t say I’d recommend LinuxVTL for use in a production environment. That’s not because I distrust it – so far it’s been remarkably stable. However, there’s no commercial support for LinuxVTL, and I think having appropriate support levels is very important in a backup environment.

What’s more, LinuxVTL is kernel-dependent, meaning that you would also have to recompile etc., every time you update your kernel.

There’s nothing stopping you using it in a production environment, to be sure, but my recommendation for use of LinuxVTL has always been as part of testing and evaluation environments, not production. (That’s not to say it won’t get there, of course.)

By: DaS

DaS — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:08:04 +0000

Is it possible to use this kind of technology in productive environments? (Many Gigabyte of data)
Is it safe, what would you think?