Hi Dennis,

We've only been using ADSM for a few months longer than
you, but for what it's worth...
I wouldn't worry about mixing files from different clients
on the same tape. When you get any significant number of
clients colocation takes a lot more tapes, and more time to
do the backup because you are swapping tapes more often.

We do have separate disk and tape pools for the various
platforms (Unix (but the 5 flavors are mixed), NT, and
Netware) because the contractor we had started us this way,
but I really don't know why.

If you do opt for co-location try to get a really huge disk
pool, then migrate the files later.

The tapepools are NOT tied to a specific drive. I don't see
how to do that unless the drives really are attached
separate boxes and you are really running two servers. (But
like I said, I'm kind of new to this myself.)

Hang in there,
Kai.


On Fri Oct 10 20:32:58 1997 DennisLovelady AT KEMET DOT COM asked:
>
> Well, I have finally reached my frustration tolerance
> level.  :^(
>
I understand where you are coming from. ADSM is better than
the other solutions we looked at, but that doesn't mean it
is easy! For what it's worth, once you get it configured
well it seems to be pretty low maintenance.

> We had ADSM installed fairly recently by a contractor.  I
> don't believe much of the configuration was done
> correctly (or, more specifically, it does not function
> the way we would like it to).
>
> Our initial ADSM site is fairly simple.  We have:
>    SP with two high nodes
>        One node has the server and admin. client, the
> other node is a client.
>    (2) 3590 drives attached to the server node
>    SP switch for communications between the nodes
>
> The way the contractor set this up, each of the drives is
> effectively allocated by one node.  There are two tape
> libraries, two tape pools,
> etc.  Each node has one tape library, one tape pool, one
> backup pool,
> .. well, you get the idea.
>
> We _do_ want backups from both nodes to be capable of
> running simultaneously.  We _do_ want to prevent mixing
> node backups on one tape (did I word that right?).  But
> we do _not_ want to be constrained in such a way that the
> tapes intended for a specific node must be mounted in a
> specific drive; and (more importantly) we do _not_ want
> to be unable to do backups when one of the drives is
> failed (as it is right now, for the fourth time).
>
> Do we ask too much?  It seems to me that we should be
> able to pull this off.  Otherwise, how in the world will
> we ever survive when we begin backing up our 60+ Novell /
> NT servers via ADSM?  60+ drives???!!!
>
> I know I can't expect a "here's exactly how you do it"
> reply from this list, but a few pointers as far as
> capabilities and options would be greatly appreciated.
>