Hi.
How can i ask to unsuscribe me of this emailing
Arturo Espinoza C.
Subgerente de Procesos - IT Infrastructure Head, Chile
The Royal Bank of Scotland (Chile)
Apoquindo 3039, Las Condes, Santiago, Chile
Office: 56 2 3965138 | Fax: 56 2 3965666
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Remco Post
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 4:39 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] SANergy
On 26 mei 2009, at 21:17, Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:
>> without going into SANergy per se, I would suggest to you to think
>> very carefully what problem you want to solve by using any SAN-shared
>> filesystem.
>
> I'm not looking to solve a problem just looking for input as it
> relates to SANergy and setting up a new environment in a new location
> and only if it makes sense to do so.
You are. You want to segregate backup traffic from production traffic.
We (me too) techies tend to think in terms of solutions first, suppress that.
Define the problem first before you start looking at solutions. Define it well.
Keep things simple as possible.
>
>
> If I understand SANergy correctly it's a way to back up data in a SAN
> environment to disk pool on a SAN by keeping it off the regular
> network.
It is a way yes. BTW, since TSM 6.1 GPFS is also supported for LAN- free to
disk, and is a much better FS than SANergy. If you want to go the SAN-shared
filesystem look at GPFS first. Better, look at every solution on earth first
before you look at SANergy.
>
> If that is a correct assumption it is why I asked for responses to my
> statement about comparisons to a segregated network instead.
Ok, now, keep in mind, I don't like SANergy. IMNSHO it has been poorly
designed. Also, IMNSHO, LANfree is a lot of trouble in maintaining the client.
I'd first consider using 802.1Q VLAN tagging. Supported on all operating
systems, easy to configure and a lot cheeper. But, it's not physical
separations, so if you need that, 802.1Q is not for you. It all depends on the
problem you are trying to solve ;-) What are you limitations?
> If moving
> the backups to a segregated backup network would be just as fast then
> it seems to make sense it would be a simpler environment.
It usually is, and usually a lot less expensive. If the only reason to buy a
stack of SAN switches would be TSM, you'll also need a lot of extra knowledge,
if you need the SAN anyway, than that is not an issue....
> LAN Free direct
> to tape doesn't seem to me is going to produce the same results since
> from what I understand you would be more limited by the number of tape
> drives available to the, lets say 200 nodes backing up.
>
unless you go vtl. I like the gresham VTL for such an application, but there
are many. All have their strong and week points.
> I'm really looking for info and recommendations since I have no
> problems yet. If I'm going to be able to put up a system in a new
> environment what would be advisable given I'm probably not going to
> get to purchase direct attached storage, as in a DS4800, or new tape
> drives, but I should be able to get SAN attached disk storage instead.
> Of course I would prefer to stick with AIX and keep things simple.
>
shameless plug: I'd gladly help you design your next TSM environment, there are
so many considerations... We might even wind up using SANergy in the end ;-)
Really....
> Geoff Gill
> TSM Administrator
> PeopleSoft Sr. Systems Administrator
> SAIC M/S-B1P
> (858)826-4062 (office)
> (858)412-9883 (blackberry)
> Email: geoffrey.l.gill AT saic DOT com
--
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Remco Post
r.post AT plcs DOT nl
+31 6 248 21 622
*****Please note that my email address may have changed. For all
future correspondence, please use this address*****
********************************************************************This
message (including any attachments) is confidential and/or
privileged. It is to be used by the intended recipients only. If
you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return
e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized
use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is
strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are inherently
insecure and susceptible to change. The Royal Bank of Scotland
Group, plc ("RBS") and its US subsidiaries, and affiliates and
subsidiary undertakings, including but not limited to, RBS plc New
York and Connecticut Branches, RBS Securities Inc., ABN AMRO Bank
N.V. New York and Chicago Branches and, ABN AMRO Incorporated,
Citizens Financial Group, Inc. and RBS Citizens, N.A., shall not be
liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the
information contained in this communication or Attachment nor for
any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. RBS does not
guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been
maintained nor that this communication is free of viruses,
interceptions or interference. RBS and its subsidiaries and
affiliates do not guarantee the accuracy of any email or
attachment, that an email will be received or that RBS or its
affiliates and subsidiaries will respond to an email.
RBS makes no representations that any information contained in this
message (including any attachments) are appropriate for use in all
locations or that transactions, securities, products, instruments
or services discussed herein are available or appropriate for sale
or use in all jurisdictions, or by all investors or counterparties.
Those who utilize this information do so on their own initiative
and are responsible for compliance with applicable local laws or
regulations.********************************************************************
|
