|
Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server)
2008-12-22 15:09:17
>> On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 23:56:33 -0800, "Gee, Norman" <Norman.Gee AT LC.CA DOT
>> GOV> said:
> I guess with the rumor conversion to DB2, it would no longer be
> feasible to place the database on JBOD mirror by TSM. The
> recommendation may be RAID 5 or 6 storage with fibre channel disks
> and not SATA disks. Am I close?
It's my understanding that there will be some documentation about the
recommended db2 practices, tuned for TSM admins, Real Soon Now. At
least for the beta audience.
As you can imagine, IBM really would prefer to be able to control the
flow of information on this, so folks don't make plans based on old
information, and then get dissapointed. I imagine those of us in the
beta are staying silent for exactly this reason. :)
- Allen S. Rout
|
| <Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), (continued)
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), goc
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Richard Rhodes
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Lindsay Morris
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Richard Rhodes
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Gee, Norman
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Remco Post
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Gee, Norman
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Bill Boyer
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Kauffman, Tom
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server),
Allen S. Rout <=
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Allen S. Rout
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Richard Sims
- Re: [ADSM-L] 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Remco Post
- [ADSM-L] TSM Incremental Exchange Problem, Minns, Farren - Chichester
- Re: [ADSM-L] TSM Incremental Exchange Problem, Remco Post
- Re: [ADSM-L] TSM Incremental Exchange Problem, Minns, Farren - Chichester
[ADSM-L] SV: 5.4 --> 6.0 (server), Christian Svensson
|
|
|
