Re: [Networker] VTL Comparison
2007-04-20 11:36:20
Fazil Saiyed wrote:
Hello,
Any one out there who has VTL experiance can you relate your experiance in
regards to Performance, your vendor choice and reasons, cloning, pain
points, likes\dislikes.
Dedup exp, hardware compresion and general legato config, issues.
Our enviroment is Networker 7.3.2 on Windows 2003-64 bit.
One storage Node-Windows.
LTO-2 I2K Tape lib.
Fazil,
That is a BIG question, but I can offer up a bit. We bought the
FalconStor VTL Appliance. This is a software application, and we put the
hardware pieces together ourselves. It is not a job for the faint of
heart. We have a very experienced System Admin who did this work, as it
is quite complex to configure.
One reason we went this way is that FalconStor supplies the VTL engine
to EMC for their own VTL products, so they are very familiar with the
quirks of Legato. The VTL has been very reliable, and Networker works
well with it. Previously we were using the Advanced File Type for our
disk to disk to tape configuration, and it was nothing but a headache
trying to balance the data across multiple disk volumes.
We have been looking at the FalconStor SIR, to add dedup to our system.
This product is still very much in the beta stage, and they could not
provide us with a test platform they had promised. They are still
coding. I think the SIR is going to be a great addition our system but
it is very much bleeding edge at this point.
Regards,
Mark
--
Mark Davis
Legato NetWorker Support - I.T.S
University of Western Ontario
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and type
"signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to networker-request
AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this list. You can access the
archives at http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
|
|