ADSM-L

Re: [ADSM-L] Using system z as a TSM server/

2010-01-08 11:44:24
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Using system z as a TSM server/
From: Wanda Prather <wprather AT JASI DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:43:24 -0500
Ditto what Nick said!

Some other things to consider:

Pros:
On z/OS, TSM integrates seamlessly with your mainframe tape management.  You
don't need to use DRM on the mainframe; your mainframe tape management
system vaulting will pick up and handle your TSM tapes for you
automatically.

The biggest difference, once you get the software installed, is that to
create DB and storage pool volumes on z/OS, you have to use a z/OS utility
(naturally, because the DB, log, and storage pools will reside in a z/OS
filesystem).  After that, you manage it just like you would on any other
platform.

Cons:
You have to think harder about your TSM capacity planning issues.  Usually
on AIX or Windows, TSM is the only application.  On z/OS, you are sharing
with a lot of other apps.

z/OS has excellent facilities for insuring that a favored app gets the
priority it needs.  But TSM usually isn't considered a high-priority app,
compared to production DB apps.  That may not be a problem at night, if you
assume that all your backups will be running within a few hours.  But if
your expiration and copypool tasks run over into prime time, will you have
the CPU cycles and tape drives available?  You also have to check to see if
your mainframe has enough TCP/IP throughput to support backups, along with
whatever else it needs to do.

Most people I see moving from z/OS to another platform do so because of
software costs, not because it doesn't work well.  I wouldn't hesitate to
put up a moderate size TSM config on z/OS.  But if it's really big, do the
capacity planning vewwy vewwy carefully.

W






On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Nick Laflamme <dplaflamme AT gmail DOT com> 
wrote:

> On Jan 8, 2010, at 3:05 AM, bob molerio wrote:
>
> > Anyone using TSM for zOS?
> > I would like to know what the pros/cons/experiences are.
>
> My current employer does in one data center; my immediately previous work
> experience was to move another customer from z/OS to AIX for TSM.
>
> I'm not a MVS guy, so my list of "pros" for this is short:
>
> a) a shop already has z/OS
> b) z/OS is where they have tape drives and where they already know how to
> handle tapes.
>
> The list of cons is barely longer:
>
> a) There is no TSM version 6 for z/OS, so clearly that's not a good
> long-term direction. This is probably a response to lack of customer demand.
> b) Lots of z/OS software is (used to be?) priced by total CPU power in use
> by z/OS. Running TSM on z/OS means you require more z/OS capacity, driving
> up those your software costs.
> c) If you're used to running TSM on other platforms, having something else
> act as your library manager may feel abnormal.
>
> Apart from those pros and cons, the experiences are probably a result of
> whether you've got z/OS guys who are also trying to run TSM, if if you have
> TSM administrators who are trying to run TSM like they would on any other
> platform. Issues like "what automates responses?" will depend on whether you
> try to use z/OS native facilities or the same tools an AIX TSM site would
> use.
>
> Oddly enough, when I saw the subject line, I figured it'd be a question
> about running TSM on Linux on z/Series. That can run on IFLs, and that
> doesn't factor into your z/OS software costs, because that's not z/OS
> capacity.
>
> What are the contending platforms? How disciplined and experienced are you
> on those platforms? Many of us love AIX as a host platform for TSM, but if
> you don't have any AIX experience, the learning curve there may deter you.
> Others run TSM on Windows, although there are those who cringe at putting
> major services on a Windows server, perhaps related to bad experiences with
> Windows as a workstation, or bad experiences with Windows administrators who
> don't understand why servers are different from workstations.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>