It _was_ some time ago I look into lanfree. Plus, we are still on TSM
v5.5.
Rick
From: "Prather, Wanda" <wPrather AT ICFI DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: 09/27/2011 02:26 PM
Subject: Re: Ang: Re: [ADSM-L] vtl versus file systems for pirmary
pool
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
I didn't think Sanergy was still supported?
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Robert Clark
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 1:39 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Ang: Re: [ADSM-L] vtl versus file systems for
pirmary pool
By LANFree, you mean LAN Free to disk?
last time I looked at it, Sanergy was NFS for UNIX hosts, and CIFS for
Windows. (So if you have both platforms in your environment, you needed
two setups.)
If you used NFS for the front-end semantics, you still had some
range-based locking for the shared disk accessed over the SAN. The
presence of the SAN disk and the Sanergy special sauce made this solution
"LAN Free".
If you're just talking about using NFS as a storage target for a storage
agent, then that is something else. Unless you're running TCP/IP over your
FC switches, that NFS traffic is going over the LAN. If the data traffic
flows over the LAN, that isn't LAN Free.
Thanks,
[RC]
From: Rick Adamson <RickAdamson AT WINN-DIXIE DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: 09/27/2011 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Ang: Re: [ADSM-L] vtl versus file systems for
pirmary pool
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
Sorry, By not supported I meant for lan-free. Every bit of documents I've
read only refer to using a physical or virtual tape library.
~Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Allen S. Rout
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 12:55 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Ang: Re: [ADSM-L] vtl versus file systems for
pirmary pool
On 09/27/2011 12:02 PM, Rick Adamson wrote:
> The bigger question I have is since the file based storage is
> native to TSM why exactly is using a file based storage > not
supported?
Not supported by what?
If you've got a DD, then the simplest way to connect it to TSM is via
files. Some backup apps require something that looks like a library, in
which case you'd be buying the VTL license.
FWIW, if you're already in DD space, you're paying a pretty penny. The
VTL license isn't chicken feed, I agree, but it's not a major component of
the total cost.
- Allen S. Rout
U.S. BANCORP made the following annotations
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains
information that is, or may be, covered by electronic communications
privacy laws, and is also confidential and proprietary in nature. If you
are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are legally
prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise
disclosing this information in any manner. Instead, please reply to the
sender that you have received this communication in error, and then
immediately delete it. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
the original message.
|
