lto4 vs 3592 tapes

[quinstear]

Hi,

I would like to do a comparison between the lto4 media and TS1130 (3592 generation 3) media. Currently we used TS1120 (3592 generation 2) media, but are looking at upgrading. Baring in mind the difference in cost etc, one test I would like to carry out is to install at loan lto4 and compare compression ratios.

Can anyone suggest a good way of doing this in TSM. I was thinking of creating another copy storagepool and having a second copy of production data on lto4 test tapes, but would like to first take a direct copy of a volume from a storage group. I know I could move the data, but do not want to start moving production data.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance

 

[moon-buddy]

Personally, I would stick to the 3592 tapes. Try to get the generation 5 or later as these tapes can hold more data, and can read your gen 2 tapes.

As for compression test, it would not be easy as you will be comparing apples with oranges. I personally would not use compression as a means of selection but rather media reliability. I honestly believe that 3592 tapes are more reliable than LTO tapes.

 

[heada]

I've been using 3590/3592 media since the mid 90's. I switched from 3590B11 to 3590E11 to 3590E1A to 3592J1A to 3592E05. I have tapes that I wrote to many years ago that I can still read today. As far as reliability goes, you can't get much better than the 3590/3592 drive/media.

Stick with the drives you know.

-Aaron

 

[quinstear]

Thanks for the replies. We are carrying out an evaluation. We have close to 10,000 onsite 3592 tapes plus the DR copies. So with the cost of 3592 being over twice that of lto4 we need to look at cost vs performance etc.

No doubt management will deem that cost is the most important factor, but we need to prove one way or another whether 3592 is that much better that lto4.

 

[moon-buddy]

Thanks for the replies. We are carrying out an evaluation. We have close to 10,000 onsite 3592 tapes plus the DR copies. So with the cost of 3592 being over twice that of lto4 we need to look at cost vs performance etc.

No doubt management will deem that cost is the most important factor, but we need to prove one way or another whether 3592 is that much better that lto4.

If you say that you have over 10,000 3592 tapes, then what is the logic of switching to LTO4 tapes? Switching to LTO4 will make you buy more LTO4 tapes in order to migrate the old 2592 tapes. You will definitely encounter more costs doing the switch versus sticking to 3592 tapes.

 

[quinstear]

Ah well that is not totally the plan. As we continue to grow the amount of data we are storing we need to look at several aspect of upgrading from TS1120 to either ts1130 or lto4/5. We would not replace the existing 3592 tapes but keep them as a pool of tape. For the project we are looking at several factors which include - Performance, Reliability, drive cost, media cost, storage etc. I personally have no preference which way we go. For simplicity staying with 3592 tape would be easiest, but these days every company has to take in to account cost, and if LTO can give us what we require it would potentionally save hundreds of thousands. Especially as it is not just IBM that sells LTO media

I found this statement on an IBM blog (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/b...mStorage?entry=2008_announcements_for_july_15), which is quite interesting

Tony, Hello! Is there any good benchmark data available on TS1130 vs. LTO-4? I have a large user trying to make that decision for a massive TSM implementation at this time.



Russell,
Depends on the TSM server platform. For TSM on z/OS, TS1130 is the better choice, offering both ESCON and FICON attachment. For all other platforms, the tradeoffs favor LTO4. TS1130 is faster (160MB/sec) and higher capacity (1TB per catridge) than LTO4 (120MB/sec and 800GB cartridges), but if you don't need all the other additional features of the TS1130, the LTO-4 can be more cost-effective solution.

 

[Ehahn]

I am a testing facility for all types of media. Enterprise tape such as 3592's have deemed to be more reliable than midrange LTO media in regards to mechanical problems and archiving. Although you may save in the increased capacity, in the long run, if there are reliability problems, it may cost the same or more.