Best HBAs and drives to use with LTFS #442
Comments
|
"Please, can we have a list of suggested HBAs so we can use LTFS properly? What is everyone here using successfully?" |
|
Compatibility verification between drive and HBA is out-of-scope of this project. Drive vendors might provide supported HBA lists on their web site. Please use a HBA the vendor recommends or they are saying 'supported'. I described a few HBAs I confirmed on my bench below, but it is impossible to list all supported HBAs here without any contribution from others on both work time and money. |
|
On 2024-03-25 03:28, Atsushi Abe wrote:
Compatibility verification between drive and HBA is out-of-scope of
this project.
Yes, I - at least - don't think there was any expectation on you / the
project to start validating. Whether any space in the docs/wiki for
user-submitted reports (and maybe a "call out" for contributions) would
reduce the support burden (!) and/or help users at large I can't say.
|
|
Thank you for your suggestion. Where is the best place you think? I think the repository and Wiki on this project is not good places. What is your suggestion about the place? |
I do not know, nor would speculate on the amount of use it might get by contributors, but personally I feel it would be good to have kept it within the project - and perhaps reducing the workload to yourself - for both visibility and credibility. I am not familiar with the user's use of Wiki here on Github, but could there be scope even for a new "branch" and people could submit PRs to a specific page or pages? I don't know the back-end's granularity for permissions, but I could see you would not want it in the "code's branch". At least this way there is one location, it is under your nominal oversight and thus could be removed if you felt it was distracting or being somehow misused, and the risk is less that something on super-dooper-host.com doesn't disappear and get redirected to a domain you would not want this project associated with. Maybe other community members could give some more helpful insight? |
The Wiki on GH doesn't have any "branch" at all and it doesn't have any function to correspond with an issue like code change. It just holds documents and only project member can modify them. So I think Wiki is not a good place, because one of the members need to modify anyway. The point is how to maintain the list without workload of the members in this project. Because I'm not sure it is really valuable for this project. The main statement is "Please use a HBA the vendor recommends or they are saying 'supported'.". We don't want to recommend any 3rd-party HBAs that is not supported by the tape drive vendors... |
|
On 2024-04-23 08:20, Atsushi Abe wrote:
The Wiki on GH doesn't have any "branch" at all and it doesn't have
any function to correspond with an issue like code change. It just
holds documents and only project member can modify them. So I think
Wiki is not a good place, because one of the members need to modify
anyway.
Ah, thank you for the clarification.
The point is how to maintain the list. I'm not sure it is really
valuable for this project. The main statement is "Please use a HBA the
vendor recommends or they are saying 'supported'.". We don't want to
recommend any 3rd-party HBAs that is not supported by the tape drive
vendors...
I guess -- at least -- I have not noticed that many messages asking
about HBAs so maybe it is not a great problem and thus spending time
looking for a solution of a (non)-problem is not valuable.
I can just see, maybe enthusiasts who don't have company access to the
latest and greatest hardware AND also vendor support in general being a
small (?) group here, and it was them I was thinking about in case
they've decided to jump into the LTO world, maybe pick up a cheap (no
longer that cheap!) working LTO on eBay and then scramble to figure it
out. And then discover your wonderful project that I benefit from
myself! (If there was a donate link I'd happily test it works -- even if
it gives you a warm drink or several as a token of appreciation.)
In the expectation that it is a low-demand "feature", could it even be a
case of leaving one "mega thread" post in the "issues" tab, made clear
it is not necessarily "official" in terms of recommendations and
support, but then any interested parties could post their working set
ups if they so desire? Inelegant maybe, but better than nothing.
Otherwise, I would tend to suggest it not beneficial discovering,
signposting and (someone) maintaining an off-GH location.
|
|
Thank you for your quick response. How about this.
|
|
On 2024-04-23 09:34, Atsushi Abe wrote:
How about this.
(snip)
Sure, but that creates more work for the project's members (even though
I doubt you will get dozens of submissions a week). If you feel that
such would not distract from the core work of the project, certainly I
see it there as a good solution AND it can be pointed to if someone
misses it and asks in "issues" about X...
D
|
|
OK. Start from that for now. Let's see what will happen. |
|
I prepared the page on Wiki and the report template on the repository. See https://github.com/LinearTapeFileSystem/ltfs/wiki/Confirmed-HBA-list. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I was using LTFS in the past with mixed results. While ca. 3 years ago everything was working as expected, I cannot use tapes created back then because of read errors. I had a different controller then, but would also definitely buy a suggested controller which works 100%.
Describe the solution you'd like
Please, can we have a list of suggested HBAs so we can use LTFS properly? What is everyone here using successfully?
Thanks for any pointer!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: