Why Lto-10 Fell Short on Speed and Backward Compatibility
Posted2 months agoActive2 months ago
blocksandfiles.comTechstory
calmmixed
Debate
20/100
Tape StorageLto TechnologyBackup Systems
Key topics
Tape Storage
Lto Technology
Backup Systems
The discussion revolves around the limitations of LTO-10 tape technology, specifically its speed and backward compatibility, with commenters sharing their experiences and concerns about tape storage.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
7h
Peak period
5
8-10h
Avg / period
1.8
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Nov 8, 2025 at 4:41 AM EST
2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Nov 8, 2025 at 11:32 AM EST
7h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
5 comments in 8-10h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 9, 2025 at 4:53 AM EST
2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45855481Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 1:26:54 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
I mean, if you're backing up multiples of 36 TB of anything, I would guess that most of it is already compressed.
At least on the LTO tape drives I have used, will disable compression if the size is larger in an adaptive way.
As tape read and write speeds depend on data size, it is still worth the effort to try and opportunistically compress data on drive.
As this can usually be done without stopping or slowing the tape, there really isn’t much of a downside.
As for the compressed capacity, that is just 30+ years of marketing conventions, which people just ignore as it has always assumed your data was 2:1 compressible.
Images, videos, music are compressed. RAWs from my camera are compressed too. Even log files tend to be compressed.
What else do people store that would amount to multiples of 30TB and not already have some form of compression?
And you'll have a rough idea what it is you are going to be storing and how compressible it is if you spending that kind of money.
It's marketing and a little skeezy to quote it and I bet they have some justification for why they arrived at 2.5:1 compression.
EDIT: Yeah it's 30TB - been many years since I had anything to do with LTO but they use a modified version of LZS called SLDC so it's that that they are assuming will get 2.5:1 on "random enteprise data that isn't already compressed" the 2.5 threw me as well because that used to be 2:1 so either they improved SLDC or thought they could wing it - looks like that switched between LTO-5 and LTO-6.
Both do about 300 MB/s
Easy to remenber : 1 TB per hour per drive