ADSM-L

Re: [ADSM-L] tsm and data domain

2011-06-17 11:15:13
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] tsm and data domain
From: Rick Adamson <RickAdamson AT WINN-DIXIE DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:05:07 -0400
Steven,
  I agree, you comment is regard to the copy pools is something I am a
little concerned with. I am preparing the move from 5.5 to ver 6.2 now
and am in conversations with management on that very subject so I can
procure the needed resources.
  The talks are somewhat challenging to say the least as the DD reps had
already told them that the copy pools were not necessary. My concern led
to the age-old question "what are the chances that something like that
would happen to us?"
Just in case I do have the proverbial warning email archived away.


~Rick


-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Steven Langdale
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 10:30 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] tsm and data domain

>
> I have had DD implemented for about a year now, but I fail to
understand
> why anyone would utilize the DD VTL license when using TSM?
>
> Mine are setup as a simple SAN device with defined directories that
> correspond to my TSM primary storage pools. I have the device calss in
> TSM set as the type "file" and let TSM manage the virtual volumes as
it
> would any other disk storage. There is another DD system that is
located
> at our DR facility, and all data including TSM DB backups are
replicated
> to that location. This allows me to no longer have copy pools.
>
>
Rick

A not uncommon configuration, I have also used DD's of NFS for disk
pools as
well.  Then only time I've seen them as VTL's is when LAN Free was
required.

I would however think again about not having a copy pool as you are
leaving
yourself open to TSM logically corrupting data and having no backup.

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