Forum Replies Created
What you’re describing is actually a perfect use case for LTO. Large, mostly static datasets with infrequent access are exactly what tape is designed for. With Linear Tape-Open, you can move away from keeping everything spinning 24/7 and reduce both risk and cost.
You can access LTO like a filesystem using LTFS, but it’s not the same as a hard drive. It’ll feel more like very slow external storage with high latency, especially when seeking files. If your workflow involves copying datasets locally before use, though, that limitation probably won’t be a dealbreaker.
At the point where you’re consistently hitting unrecoverable errors across drives, DIY options become pretty limited. You can still try partial restores (especially with LTFS), but for anything critical, a professional recovery service may be the only way to get deeper reads using specialized equipment. Tape recovery is a different beast compared to disks, unfortunately.
If you haven’t already, try multiple passes with different drives of the same generation (or compatible newer ones). Sometimes alignment differences between drives can recover blocks that others can’t. Also, make sure the drives are properly cleaned—dirty heads can make read errors look worse than they actually are.
<p data-start=”944″ data-end=”1274″>There isn’t really a true “ddrescue for tape” equivalent that works reliably across all LTO formats. Tape is sequential, so skipping errors can break the data stream. Some enterprise tools can retry reads with different block sizes or error thresholds, but results vary a lot depending on how damaged the tape is.</p>
Since you used both Archiware P5 and LTFS, your recovery options differ slightly. LTFS tapes are easier to work with because they’re file-based, so you can sometimes copy whatever is readable and skip damaged files. With P5, you’re more dependent on its catalog and restore process, which can make partial recovery harder if there are read errors in critical blocks.
What you’re describing sounds like pretty typical LTO degradation or media wear, especially with older generations like LTO-3. Unfortunately, once you start getting unrecoverable read errors across multiple drives, it usually points to the tape itself rather than the hardware. Creating a full “raw image” of an LTO tape isn’t really straightforward like it is with hard drives, but some tools can attempt block-level reads and skip bad sections.
For LTO workflows, I’ve seen a lot of post-production teams move toward verification-heavy tools rather than traditional backup software. Things like checksum validation and cataloging become really important when you’re dealing with long-term archives. LTFS is great because it keeps things more transparent and less vendor-locked.
What you’re running into is pretty common—disk-based backups grow endlessly if there’s no lifecycle policy. Moving to a 30-day rolling backup on your NAS and pushing completed projects to LTO is a solid approach. Also, consider splitting “working storage” and “backup storage” more strictly—using the same system for both can get messy over time.
What you’re running into is pretty common—disk-based backups grow endlessly if there’s no lifecycle policy. Moving to a 30-day rolling backup on your NAS and pushing completed projects to LTO is a solid approach. Also, consider splitting “working storage” and “backup storage” more strictly—using the same system for both can get messy over time.
Your hybrid idea actually makes a lot of sense. Using your Synology units for short-term DR and LTO for long-term archive is pretty much how a lot of studios handle it. For LTO software, you might want to look at LTFS-based workflows or something like YoYotta—it’s much more stable for large media archives compared to older tools like Retrospect.
This kind of issue is pretty common after an improper shutdown. The NAS might be stuck trying to sync but failing due to a timeout setting or system load. If your Ugreen NAS has an option to stop the current task or restart RAID management services, try that before re-initiating the repair.
Since it’s RAID 1, your data should still be safe on at least one drive. If you’re nervous, the safest move is to back up the accessible data first before doing anything else. After that, you can retry the repair or even remove and re-add the secondary drive to force a rebuild.
<p data-start=”381″ data-end=”682″>If the repair task keeps timing out, it could be because one of the drives is responding slowly or hitting read errors. Even if SMART shows “healthy,” the disk might still be struggling. I’d suggest running a full SMART extended test on both drives before attempting the repair again.</p>
<p data-start=”50″ data-end=”349″>That’s actually a really solid recovery outcome considering the situation. Once a Synology DS218+ volume crashes during a drive swap, things can go downhill fast. Good call pulling the healthy drive and working on it separately—that’s usually the safest way to avoid further damage.</p>
<p data-start=”50″ data-end=”349″></p>