Well, my testing is done. I reported that hardware compression was better, but in fact Stan pointed out that I had misread my own benchmarks. I must conclude that on a 969/200, it is better to use turbostore's software compression over the drives hardware compression to save time. The software compression on turbostore reports compression as follows:- FILE DATA COMPRESSED RATIO PERCENTAGE MEDIA 1 9913835530 2935662168 3.4:1 70% Not bad. The largest files (60% of data) are TurboImage datasets (fairly full). So I guess that with 12GB before compression at 3.4:1, I could look forward to getting about 4 times as much data on the DAT i.e. 12GB of pre compressed data, or almost 40GB of uncompressed Data. This is impressive stuff. I tried to get the results of the hardware compression using SCSIDDS utilities, but apparently, I'm not capable of deciding for myself whether to run these diagnostics, and I must apply for a suplicen password, so that'll have to wait. I hope that early next year, I'll be able to report on four DDS3 drives in parallel on a 959/400 :) Now, if only the DDS3 drives turn out to be more reliable than the DDS2 drives........................... Regards Neil (see you in Chicago) Harvey