David-

For what it's worth, we just went through an eval of which to expand to
and decided to go with the Cadillac-- the 3590.  For thruput, it will beat
LTO hands down, due to the stopping and starting technology on the drives.
 We archive Oracle data thru an SP switch, and we get rates of 40MB/sec.

Go with the addt'nl frame on the 3494 & the 3590E drives.

Another thing to think about, is that 1Q 2002, half-height 3590 drives are
supposed to be available, if you can wait that long.

lisa




David DeCuir <David.Decuir AT CLUBCORP DOT COM>
05/31/2001 10:16 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


        To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
        cc:     (bcc: Lisa Cabanas/SC/MODOT)
        Subject:        LTO and 3590



Hello,
I have read some archives about LTO vs 3590. I get  mixed feelings about
which is better depending on the situation. I would like to ask for your
opinions on my specific case. Here are the facts:

I am a TSM newbie < 6 months.
Current hardware is:
3494 w/2 3590E1A drives
3466-C00 w/H50 server
288gb SSA 7133-D40
We are needing to about double our current hardware (rough estimate)
The additional backups will be 70/30 small file/large file (all from NT)

The are 3 options on the table
1) add 3590EA1 drives (and additional frame)
2) add LTO drives (and whatever frame)
3) sell 3590 system and replace with LTO system

My first thoughts are to just add 3590's. Been working fine for a year.
I'm still gathering price info. but if cost was basically the same what
would you do?
I don't think cost will be significantly less for any of the three. Maybe
I'm wrong.
Advantages/disadvantages to these options?
If cost were much lower for LTO would you go with it?
If complete LTO replacement, would data migration off 3590 be a nightmare?
Also, I don't really need fast restore times

Thanks for any advice
David