Good morning
I am using TSM and NBU , I always prefer TSM for following reason ...
1). TSM has its own command line interface which u can use for kind of
activity.
2). TSM has its own database which is good. NBU has database but it
spread in folder which can be modified accidently.
3). NBU IS TOO BUGY.
4). TSM starts only one process ( dsmserv ) , NBU start tons of
processes which is hard to manage.
5). I find TSM very friendly to script how u want . NBU no way.
6). NBU tons of administration task. But ONCE TSM architect correctly it
will work without a glitch.
7). We liked TSM , but we moving to NBU since NBU sells guy convinced
TOP management that NBU is good and make it standard. It seems TSM sells
team are not that powerfull.
so on top of my head.
Good luck

On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 08:12:01 -0700, "Thorneycroft, Doug"
<dthorneycroft AT LACSD DOT ORG> said:
> With TSM, it doesn't really make sense to make two copies of a tape,
> since
> things are managed at the object level. Copy Pools are used instead.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]On Behalf Of
> Paul Zarnowski
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 7:56 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: NBU user considering switch to TSM
>
>
> At 06:58 PM 9/29/2008, steve sorenson wrote:
> > >> 1. He could make simultaneous copies during the initial backup, but not
> > >> during migration and while copying to the copy pool.
> > >>
> > >
> > > TSM can migrate from random-access disk to serial (tape), simultaneously
> > > copying to the copy pool(s).  I don't have first-hand experience with 
> > > this,
> > > but plan to soon.
> >
> >
> >I was referring to the feature of creating two copies of one set of data
> >simultaneously.  NBU calls this Inline Tape Copy, where NBU takes one backup
> >stream and "twins" it, sending one stream to one device and another stream
> >to another device.  It can do this either during the initial backup, or when
> >copying backups after the backup is done, like when you're migrating data or
> >making copies to go offsite.  The point is to read the data and transfer it
> >in memory only one time, but have two copies when you're done.  I was told
> >that TSM had a similar feature, but that it could only do this during the
> >initial backup, not when copying data.  Do I understand this feature
> >correctly?
>
> In TSM, generally you have a disk storage pool in front of tape.  At
> least,
> this is always the way I've used it, as this enables more concurrent
> backup
> sessions and collocation on tape.  With progressive incremental, I don't
> really see the need to write to two devices simultaneously as the backup
> data is coming in over the network from clients.  The point is, if you
> want
> to ensure that you've always got tape-resident data on at least 2
> different
> tape volumes, you can do that in TSM.  If you want to be sure that your
> data is fully protected on disk, before it gets to tape, I suppose you
> could do that with a disk subsystem that implements synchronous mirroring
> of some sort.  If you want to have the incoming data be resident on both
> disk and a tape synchronously, as it comes in, you can't do that.  I'm
> not
> that familiar with NBU, but if it does not employ progressive
> incremental,
> perhaps the desire to only have the data in memory once is more
> important?
>
>
>
> --
> Paul Zarnowski                            Ph: 607-255-4757
> Manager, Storage Services                 Fx: 607-255-8521
> 719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801    Em: psz1 AT cornell DOT edu