And to throw in my two cents, yes I agree that building a recovered system
on-site and shipping it off-site makes a lot of sense. Plus, you probably
should have a spare-depot on-site anyway. I think the more you think about
disaster recovery, or other types of use of the data being backed up
remotely, the better the idea to have a central site for all you backups.
Good luck.
Mark Mapes
PG&E
> ----------
> From: Dave Larimer[SMTP:david.larimer.hnj9 AT STATEFARM DOT COM]
> Reply To: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager
> Sent: Monday, September 14, 1998 6:28AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec
>
> An alternative suggestion on the use of ADSM, the issue is that you do not
> wish to use ADSM over the network because of restore being too slow. If
> this is correct, I would give you an alternative suggestion. Given that a
> disaster situation is hopefully few and far between, backup all data via
> ADSM through the network and in the event of an actual disaster, construct
> a new box at the central site, restore it there and ship it to the remote
> location. The cost savings eliminating local software, tape library,
> hardware and labor would be substantial. In addition, when I evaluated
> Arcserve, Backup Exec, and ADSM, I found the following:
> Backup time: (depending on how much data changes from day to day) I found
> that overall ADSM came in first, followed closely by Arcserve
> and then by Backup Exec.
> Restore time: (depending on severity of restore and network connectivity)
> All three products performed about the same, with ADSM having a
> slight edge, due to it's strength as file restore software. In ADSM, the
> file is ready as soon as it is restored. This may not be the case
> with the other two products.
> Service Support: This is the part that I experienced the most variety,
> with
> ADSM, I found the most support, followed by Arcserve and then
> Backup Exec a distance third. Backup Exec's support fell off sharply
> during off hours.
> Cost savings: ADSM clearly came out ahead here in all categories.
>
> I hope that this helps.
>
> Dave Larimer
> David.Larimer.HNJ9 AT StateFarm DOT com
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
> O1=INET00/C=US/A=IBMX400/P=STATEFARM/DD.RFC-822=ADSM-L\@VM.MARIST.EDU
> on 09/11/98 04:21:21 PM
> To: ADSM-L
> cc:
> Subject: ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec
>
> Help!
>
> There is a shift going on within our company where many Netware
> servers are being consolidated to larger NT servers. A large number of
> these Netware soon to be NT servers are located in remote offices
> connected
> to our statewide ATM backbone via T1 lines. The new NT servers in the
> remote offices will contain approximately 6 - 10 GB of user data.
> In most cases we were not planning on backing up the remote NT machines to
> a central ADSM server because it would take too long to restore an entire
> machine in a disaster recovery scenario. This means, for the remote
> offices, local tape, probably a IBM 3570 library, would be used with the
> standalone version of ADSM. We also thought we might backup the 3570
> storage pools to a central server for disaster protection.
>
> Our current enviroment is ADSM for MVS v3 backing up 100 clients all
> within the Datacenter or close by. Clients are AIX, SUN, HP, Windows NT
> (Lotus Notes Servers), and 1 Netware server. ADSM has been in used to
> backup our UNIX servers for nearly 3 years. Arcserve is currently used to
> backup the Netware servers using a DAT tape drive attached to each server.
> We standardized, or a least I thought we did, on using ADSM company wide
> about a year and a half ago.
>
> Ok that's the background on to the problem.. A person from our
> distributed computing group informed me today that they have pretty much
> decided to go with Arcserve or Seagate Backup Exec to backup the remote
> office servers. This decision was made without my involvement and
> shouldn't have been.. But that's a political issue.. The question I have
> for you good people is has anyone out there done a side by side comparison
> of the ADSM single server version versus Arcserve and/or Seagate Backup
> Exec? Any ammo you can give me that shows ADSM is the better choice would
> be GREATLY appreciated. It is their feeling that ADSM is too slow and not
> widely used in the industry for backing up Windows NT or Netware.
>
>
> Thanks!
> Jeff Connor
> Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
> Syracuse NY
>
|