Here's another one.

Try this link it may help you.

ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/tivoli/analystreports/tsm.pdf

or
http://www-3.ibm.com/software/tivoli/library/analystreports/

As for STK vs 34XX. I've used 3494 for years. A few of the sites I have had
have a mixture of 3494 +  STK PowderHorns etc.. all with 3590's. All are
reliable. Rarely have trouble. Some are more than 6 - 7 years old. ATL's
will more than likely outlast your servers and tape drives! Afterall what is
there to wear out??

On the drive side, tape access speeds are good. But where we have long tape
retention times, read/write speed, and reliablity are all important. On the
other hand we also use the TSM API for cutting pieces out of the data stored
within TSM so there is a lot of start stop activity. Hence, the 3590, 3590E.


Guess it depends on the size you bosses piggy bank :-)
Cheers


-----Original Message-----
From: Leonard Lauria [mailto:leonard AT UKY DOT EDU]
Sent: 30 September, 2003 9:30 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Tape Technology Comparison


Our experience has been with 9840 (A's) and LTO gen 1 drives.  The 9840s
have
been rock solid for years, while the LTO has had more failures in the past
14 months
or so than all of our STK drives over the past 8 or so years.

The LTOs started off rough, but I must admit that lately things have
stabalized, though
we still have some oddities occur (may be SAN backup related).  I wouldn't
be concerned
with the proprietary drives from STK.

Our libraries are a STK 4410, STK 9310 (11,000 slots total) and a IBM 3584
single frame.
No problems with the robotics in any of them.

leonard

At 01:09 PM 9/30/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>Hello
>
>Anybody out there able to share their thoughts and experiences?
>
>We're doing a technology refresh on some of our libraries and have a number
>of products in the frame:
>IBM 3584 / LTO-2
>ADIC Scalar i2000 / LTO-2
>HP ESL9322 / LTO-2
>StorageTek L700e / T9940B
>
>The interesting one from my point of view is the L700e with its T9940B
>drives. The performance/capacity comparisons between LTO-2 and T9940B seem
>close enough to make no difference which leaves cost and reliability as the
>differentiators.
>
>Reliability will be an important factor in our decision and the T9940B
>seems to be marketed as a high duty cycle, 24 x 7 drive. Does anybody have
>any real world experieces in a TSM environment which suggest the T9940B is
>more (or less) reliable than LTO-2? Should I be concerned about going for a
>'proprietary' technology like 9x40 instead of an 'open' standard like LTO?
>
>Also, any thoughts on the libraries we are considering would be gratefully
>appreciated.