Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB
1999-11-16 15:52:24
The database part of ADSM is now transparant. I do not know, nor nead to know,
DB2. Other than a lack of canned queries, I do not see a need for a change in
the database component.
Larry Clark
NYS Thruway Authority
>>> Bill Colwell <bcolwell AT DRAPER DOT COM> 11/16/99 12:56PM >>>
Rick, I guess you just have a more active imagination than me! ;-)
I sent a note to someone at Tivoli about this and he replied in part --
"I agree that we need to look at using an industry
standard DB for high-end customers.
Keep pushing for this with other customers.
Make sure our marketing group understands."
So what does everyone think of this? Would you want TSM to use
db2/oracle/whatever for the database? Would it be easier to backup/reorg
tune? Would you think that your backups are more secure?
Would TSM be a better product? If performance went down, how much of
a decrease would you accept?
So let's hear it! Here's your chance for input to a major change in
TSM.
--
--------------------------
--------------------------
Bill Colwell
Bill Colwell
C. S. Draper Lab
Cambridge, Ma.
bcolwell AT draper DOT com
--------------------------
In <199911161303.IAA07261 AT gatekeeper.firstenergycorp DOT com>, on 11/16/99
In <199911161303.IAA07261 AT gatekeeper.firstenergycorp DOT com>, on 11/16/99
at 08:03 AM, "Richard L. Rhodes" <rhodesr AT FIRSTENERGYCORP DOT COM> said:
>This is an interesting discussion. Let me give a view from someone
>evaluating ADSM/TSM.
>We don't have DB2. What we do have is an extensive infrastructure
>setup to handle Oracle (backup, recovery, DR, tuning). If ADSM/TSM
>required a full DB2 installation we would have to do the same for it -
> which I personally would be very reluctant to do. To me, a backup
>system should not require that I become fully competent in a DB that
>we have no other use for (currently - all things change). There are
>too many other good backup products on the market that don't require
>you to become db administrator for DB2/ORacle/Sybase/etc for
>IBM/Tivoli to make this a requirement. I believe if IBM/Tivoli did
>this they would limit the market into which ADSM/TSM could be sold.
>So, as far as I'm concerned, I'd want the db to be Oracle or the
>internal db - but not DB2!
>The question IBM/Tivoli continually has to answer is: what customer
>is ADSM/TSM being targeted at? If the answer is DB2 shops, then it
>would make sence to use DB2 as the db. If the answer is broader than
>DB2 shops, then requiring DB2 makes little sense.
>Just some thoughts . . . .
>rick
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Richard L. Rhodes e: rhodesr AT firstenergycorp DOT com
>Ohio Edison Co. p: 330-384-4904
> f: 330-384-2514
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Bill Colwell
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Remeta, Mark
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, James SPORER
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Prather, Wanda
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB,
Lawrence Clark <=
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Kelly J. Lipp
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Steve Harris
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Lambelet,Rene,VEVEY,FC-SIL/INF.
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Geetam Van Der Dussen
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Richard Sims
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Bill Colwell
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Bacchi Matt VENDOR
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Kauffman, Tom
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Nathan J. Norrgard
- Re: Using db2 or oracle or whatever for the TSM DB, Alfred Novacek
|
|
|