> This question is nominally directed to Richard Sims because it cites
> his Quickfacts. But, other knowledgeable people are welcome and
> encouraged to respond.
>
> In the '3584' entry in "ADSM/TSM Quickfacts" it is said that, "The
> 3584 is a "SCSI library": the host has to direct its actions. If
> you're accustomed to the 3494 and its automated actions, don't expect
> anything like that in the 3584. As one customer said: The 3584 is
> pretty much an automatic tape mounter with bulk storage and no real
> 'smarts'.
>
> In the 'SCSI Library' entry it is said that, "The TSM server must
> physically manage its actions, and must keep track of volume
> locations. ...the work they don't do they shift to the host, and so
> TSM is burdened with a lot of intricate SCSI element details and
> control issues."
>
> Do these entries describe current 3584 automation features,
> especially vis-a-vis TSM?  If they do, how will TSM server
> performance and administration change for the worse if we migrate
> from 3494 technology to a 3584?

We have both a 3494 and a 3584 in our dual-server TSM configuration, soon
to be 4 servers.

Our 3494 is an HA config with dual grippers on each robot.  For this
reason, all of our primary data is in the 3494, and the 3584 contains the
copy, which is SAN attached about 5 miles away.  If our 4 server config
uses a 3584 for primary data, unlike the 3494, it will have single points
of failure that the 3494 does not have.

To me, this is a step backwards.  Is there an HA option for the TS3500
yet that provides dual library managers and dual robotics along with a
manual mode of operation?  I guess if it did it would be a scsi-3494, and
the beginnings of an acceptable replacement for a 3494 with HA frames.

I much perfer the 3494's categories to scsi elements.  Sharing is simple
vs. partitioning.


Steve Roder
University at Buffalo
(spr AT buffalo DOT edu | (716)645-3564)