Hello Steve,
It would be nice if we had someone from IBM tape group that might shine some
light on the details of the product. As the TSM folks have been known to do for
TSM.
But our local IBM tape person says of the 3584 "Yes, if you have 2 robots and
one fails, the other robot takes over and does all the mounts until robot A is
repaired". And the 3584 does have dual grippers on the robot.
The 3584 does not keep track of the functional use of the tapes, but with ALMS
it does visualize the tape slot usage. That is the software is given a virtual
slot number and not the real slot.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Steve Roder
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 12:47 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] 3584 vs 3494
> This question is nominally directed to Richard Sims because it cites
> his Quickfacts. But, other knowledgeable people are welcome and
> encouraged to respond.
>
> In the '3584' entry in "ADSM/TSM Quickfacts" it is said that, "The
> 3584 is a "SCSI library": the host has to direct its actions. If
> you're accustomed to the 3494 and its automated actions, don't expect
> anything like that in the 3584. As one customer said: The 3584 is
> pretty much an automatic tape mounter with bulk storage and no real
> 'smarts'.
>
> In the 'SCSI Library' entry it is said that, "The TSM server must
> physically manage its actions, and must keep track of volume
> locations. ...the work they don't do they shift to the host, and so
> TSM is burdened with a lot of intricate SCSI element details and
> control issues."
>
> Do these entries describe current 3584 automation features, especially
> vis-a-vis TSM? If they do, how will TSM server performance and
> administration change for the worse if we migrate from 3494 technology
> to a 3584?
We have both a 3494 and a 3584 in our dual-server TSM configuration, soon to be
4 servers.
Our 3494 is an HA config with dual grippers on each robot. For this reason,
all of our primary data is in the 3494, and the 3584 contains the copy, which
is SAN attached about 5 miles away. If our 4 server config uses a 3584 for
primary data, unlike the 3494, it will have single points of failure that the
3494 does not have.
To me, this is a step backwards. Is there an HA option for the TS3500 yet that
provides dual library managers and dual robotics along with a manual mode of
operation? I guess if it did it would be a scsi-3494, and the beginnings of an
acceptable replacement for a 3494 with HA frames.
I much perfer the 3494's categories to scsi elements. Sharing is simple vs.
partitioning.
Steve Roder
University at Buffalo
(spr AT buffalo DOT edu | (716)645-3564)
|
