Mark Klivansky writes:
> I would like to ask ADSM users if many are happy with a product or
support.
While ADSM, like any other software product, has its own "warts and
blemishes", I am very happy with the product. We use it to back up
around 100 clients accounting for over 100GB of data, and it has
thus far (knock on wood) been 100% reliable. (Lot's of 100's, just
coincidence.) I am using ADSM on an MVS server with 3480 tape.
From my experience with different IBM support areas, the IBM Storage
Systems Division, and ADSM support in particular, provide the best
support within IBM. Compared with other software vendors I've dealt
with, their support is as good, if not better.
This isn't to say that they *always* move as fast as I'd like; just
that overall support is excellent.
> A few month ago we installed ADSM on our SP2 machine, but we can't call
> it backup solution yet.
>
> Very often we have tape drive problems, sometimes these errors not in
errpt
> but on activity log as OP=WRITE or READ with sense=00.00.00.00.
> These errors terminate process, after 20 GB of data already processed.
Is this an ADSM problem or a tape drive problem?
> Many features which in ADSM books or README files don't work, and I am
> getting fallacious answer, for example, DSMSCHED.LOG pruning will happen
> only after scheduler will be restarted, even IBM suggested to include
SCHLOGR
> (days),[s n] in DSM.SYS. So why bother with this parameters, if our goal
> to do backup with centralize scheduler and automate backup as much as
> possible.
Agreed. When the log-pruning feature first came out, I was pretty happy
with it. I don't think it was initially documented to work as it did.
Imagine my surprise (and dismay) when I opened a problem with IBM and
found out that it was "working as designed". I politely told them that
their design was incorrect (and I got the impression that I wasn't the
only one) so they subsequently changed it to do pruning after execution
of each scheduled event. If you do daily incremental backups, the logs
will be pruned when the backup completes. This is available with the
V2 clients, which can be downloaded from the FTP anonymous server.
> Sometimes ADSM create duplicate names in filespaces and refusing to
> backup filesystem from clients nodes because of it.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this, but if you mean that you
can't back up (for example) a Windows client that has two drives both
labeled the same, then yes this is true. This is due to the way ADSM
stores the client's data on the server. The high-level name for a
client's filespace is the drive label (ADSM doesn't track drive
letters like C: or D:). If ADSM were to process two drives with duplicate
labels, the server would store them in one filespace. Then there would
be no way to determine which files go back to which physical drive. For
example, suppose you have two drives labeled as "MYDATA". The first drive
contains two files, A.TXT and B.TXT. The second drive contains X.TXT
and Y.TXT. ADSM then backs up both drives, storing A.TXT, B.TXT, X.TXT,
and Y.TXT in a filespace called "MYDATA". Now suppose you need to restore
one of the drives due to, say, a hardware failure. ADSM has no way of
knowing whether to put back A.TXT and B.TXT, or X.TXT and Y.TXT.
The solution is to give each drive a unique label. This shouldn't be
a major problem, unless you use drive substitution. I believe that
IBM is aware of this particular issue. Hopefully they'll see fit to
provide a solution.
> When we made marketing research of backup product, many IBM
representatives
> claimed that in 4q 1994 we will be able to backup ORACLE online, now
nobody
> even mentioning if they continue working on this interface, just
referring
> to third companies.
Yes, it can be misleading. I remember IBM talking about providing space
management support for NetWare, but no mention was made of a 3rd-party
vendor involvement. So I assumed that IBM would be providing "native"
ADSM support for NetWare. Next thing I know, I'm reading about some
company (I think it's "Avail") that will write to the ADSM API to pro-
vide NetWare space management. As it turns out, this is the support
that IBM was referring to.
While I applaud IBM for making the API available for other vendors to
write to, I wish I'd known ahead of time that this is the way by which
I'd get NetWare space management. Now we have to look at buying another
software product, as opposed to looking forward to IBM providing the
function. I don't know what IBM's plans are, but it would be nice if
they could be a reseller of these products as well, so that you can
get some kind of software bundle from one vendor.
I have to give IBM the benefit of the doubt and assume that they couldn't
disclose details about *how* the space management would be delivered,
at least not without signing a non-disclosure agreement.
I think the Oracle support will be provided by Datatools, Inc. It's
possible that Oracle might also plan on writing to the ADSM API, but
I'm not positive on this. Perhaps someone else has some insight here.
> I have eggs on my face for recommending implementing ADSM.
I wouldn't feel that way. I'd imagine the tape problem has to be
correctable. As far as the Oracle support goes, well, next time
you hear IBM promise a feature, now you know whether to ask if
it will be provided by IBM or another vendor. I know this doesn't
help for this case, but it might prove helpful in the future.
I also think once you get these "kinks" worked out, you'll find
ADSM to be quite reliable.
> My questions are how to correct these problems, to whom to call to get
> quick response and resolutions, often we are waiting week to talk with
> level 2 and other week to get results.
> How people backing up 150 GB of ORACLE data base, knowing it have
reliable
> backup in case of restore.
>
> IBM people, welcome to reply.
Andy Raibeck
Connecticut Mutual
203-987-3521
|
