ADSM-L

Re: Offsite library via fiber (Specifically VTL)

2006-02-16 09:50:04
Subject: Re: Offsite library via fiber (Specifically VTL)
From: "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <Eric-van.Loon AT KLM DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:49:33 +0100
Hi Leigh!
We also choose a VTL solution (EMC's DL700) over a SATA box with a file
device class because IBM couldn't come up with a reference site of
similar size (180 TB) with a file device class. The only statement we
could get from IBM was: "It will most likely work"...
By the way, we are very happy with the virtual library concept and so
are our customers.
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Leigh Reed
Sent: woensdag 15 februari 2006 11:32
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Offsite library via fiber (Specifically VTL)

Wanda

I would be intrigued to know your thoughts on why you went specifically
with a VTL with TSM and not a more generic 'low cost' disk arrangement
with sequential files. It is a decision that I am trying to come to
terms with myself and have not yet settled in my mind which I prefer.
Apart from price, if you take into consideration ease of
management/configuration and performance, what decision making processes
did those 2 variables lead you through.

Did you go with IBM TS7510 or EMC CDL or a n other ?
I guess the last $64M question is, are you happy with the decision you
made ?
Many thanks


Leigh


-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Prather, Wanda
Sent: 13 February 2006 19:31
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Offsite library via fiber

We're doing just that.
Easy to set up if your offsite location is within fibre distance.

Only we are putting the VTL (primary pool) OFFSITE and the 3584 (copy
pool) ONSITE.

Why?

1) Tapes jam.  Drives break.  The 3584 is very reliable, but still
mechanical.  Easier to have it onsite, near us, to manage.  The VTL is
essentially lights out, so it will live offsite.

2) IF we have a disaster, having the VTL offsite means we can do DR
restores without being limited by the number of tape drives we have.
Cool idea, huh?  Means we only need 2 drives in our 3584.  Collocation &
tape mounts are no longer an issue.

And another cool thing:

3) We're even putting a spare Windows server offsite with the VTL, and
making it a backup domain controller.  TSM is already installed on it,
but inactive.  If we have a disaster, all we have to do is restore the
TSM DB.  We can start restoring files then to any machine we can get IP
connectivity to.  Our domain is still up, we don't have to recover AD.

I can hardly wait for the tornado!

Wanda Prather
"I/O, I/O, It's all about I/O"  -(me)



-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
David E Ehresman
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 3:54 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Offsite library via fiber


We're thinking of a TSM upgrade that would include a VTL onsite library
and an IBM 3584 library for copy pool tape. We would locate the 3584 in
our offsite storage location and access it via fiber. The tapes would
remain in the 3584 since they would already be offsite.

Anyone have any experience with a setup like this?

Daivd Ehresman
University of Louisville


**********************************************************************
For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), 
its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or 
incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for 
any delay in receipt.
**********************************************************************

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>