The last time I checked <10% of DD customers use the VTL option.  I'm
willing to bet that 60-80% of those are TSM customers.   The TSM folks I've
talked to seem to prefer using VTL over file-type devices, which may explain
that.  The rest of the world (except large enterprise customers) tends to
prefer NAS devices.

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 1:38 PM, ADSM-L <tsm AT networkc.co DOT uk> wrote:

> Curtis,
>
> >> Data Domain has good market share, but very few DD customers use VTL.
>
> Really? That surprises me a little (i.e., the marginalised VTL usage) and
> isn't necessarily representative of the TSM customers I've spoken to or
> worked with using DDRs, many of whom still use the VTL functionality. I
> can't comment on whether this is so much the case with shops that use other
> backup software though (e.g., I know NBU has its own OST interface).
>
> In any case, whether through VTL or NFS/CIFS the principle is the same and
> of course you're right, pre-appliance compression or even encryption can be
> catastrophic to data de-dupe ratios. Without knowing any more, it sounds
> like you may have to make a compromise somewhere without changing your
> current config Nancy, either in terms of backup data storage footprint or
> RPO.
>
> Cheers,
> __________________
> David McClelland
> London, UK
>
> On 26 Aug 2010, at 19:10, Nobody <wcplists1 AT GMAIL DOT COM> wrote:
>
> > Data Domain has good market share, but very few DD customers use
> > VTL.
>