I support 10 AIX TSM servers across a 4 LAN center environment with 4000+ clients and have installed 4 228TB Raw capacity VTLs with limited success. I am looking to get a feel for what others with my size environment are doing. VTL or sticking with tape. Also, if you have gone VTL have you had success?
-
-
Community Tip: Forum Rules (PLEASE CLICK HERE TO READ BEFORE POSTING)
Click the link above to access ADSM.ORG Acceptable Use Policy and forum rules which should be observed when using this website. Violators may be banned from this website. This notice will disappear after you have made at least 3 posts.
VTL or Tape in Large Environment
- Thread starter DanHodge
- Start date
moon-buddy
ADSM.ORG Moderator
Dan,
VTL maybe a good solution in environments wherein restore and recovery times are critical. I also share Ken's point on what do you mean by "limited success".
If the original intention of having a VTL environment was to address SLAs around recovery or restore times, and you are achieving this goal, then I can conclude that the setup is a success. But if the intention was to eliminate tapes but speed up restores, and SLAs dictates otherwise - users and the business can tolerate longer data restore times - then it may be considered "limited success" or a failure at worst.
It all depends on what the business requires and the agreed SLAs.
For one, VTLs are not cheap to setup and maintain in the long run if the intention is to keep data over a considerable period of time. In my honest opinion, if data stays on a VTL environment for more than fifteen business days, the solution is not anymore cost effective. But this must be proven quantitatively. All indications shows that the more servers defined on a VTL solution, the higher will be the operating and maintenance cost.
VTL solutions must consider what the business needs, risks and goals are. If the business cannot tolerate long restore times, then VTLs maybe the way to go. Moderate restore times maybe addressed through a combined VTL and tape solution.
VTL maybe a good solution in environments wherein restore and recovery times are critical. I also share Ken's point on what do you mean by "limited success".
If the original intention of having a VTL environment was to address SLAs around recovery or restore times, and you are achieving this goal, then I can conclude that the setup is a success. But if the intention was to eliminate tapes but speed up restores, and SLAs dictates otherwise - users and the business can tolerate longer data restore times - then it may be considered "limited success" or a failure at worst.
It all depends on what the business requires and the agreed SLAs.
For one, VTLs are not cheap to setup and maintain in the long run if the intention is to keep data over a considerable period of time. In my honest opinion, if data stays on a VTL environment for more than fifteen business days, the solution is not anymore cost effective. But this must be proven quantitatively. All indications shows that the more servers defined on a VTL solution, the higher will be the operating and maintenance cost.
VTL solutions must consider what the business needs, risks and goals are. If the business cannot tolerate long restore times, then VTLs maybe the way to go. Moderate restore times maybe addressed through a combined VTL and tape solution.
Last edited:
sgabriel62
ADSM.ORG Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Michigan
- Website
- www.sgsolutionsinc.com
I have supported two different types of VTL environments both for mid-size companies. One being EMC the other being Sepaton. And with each environment the function of the VTL is dependent on the needs of the customer's request - I need my data like yesterday what can you do for me??? The flip side to all this - some are making use of "disk" as a solution - those who read up on InfoWorld or TechRepublic -- introducing disk backups as the way of the future. Some managers find disk cheap and will implement the solution until its proven unsuccessful.
My take on your limited success - is ... you had trouble decided on which tape emulation to use that TSM is happy with - and your other concern has been the throughput of the VTL once implemented. Perhaps you expected a bit too much of the solution and you have growing pains. Well - I have not seen a common WhitePaper on any VTL solution that is 100% successful and to the letter. There is always going to be a configuration change here or there - a mode of operation change - a functionality change of the VTL.
The bottom line is your customer and keeping them happy and their data available for restore when requested.
I would suggest that you begin baselining your VTL operations vs your current SLA. Then compare it to historical tape. If after months of analysis you have found common ground to your solution and you are meeting your SLA - then improve your VTL solution and transition physical tape to third tier storage solution, or Lanfree -or special projects.
If you have found that tape has been better in the past - then you should concentrate on making VTL perform as best as possible - and then accept it. Each vendor has a VTL package, a sales pitch and support levels. The all have the common direction for disk vs tape. Do whats best for your customer base - and over time- if ROI of the original investment has failed - try again - make the past efforts goals for the next VTL solution/purchase.
Good Luck
My take on your limited success - is ... you had trouble decided on which tape emulation to use that TSM is happy with - and your other concern has been the throughput of the VTL once implemented. Perhaps you expected a bit too much of the solution and you have growing pains. Well - I have not seen a common WhitePaper on any VTL solution that is 100% successful and to the letter. There is always going to be a configuration change here or there - a mode of operation change - a functionality change of the VTL.
The bottom line is your customer and keeping them happy and their data available for restore when requested.
I would suggest that you begin baselining your VTL operations vs your current SLA. Then compare it to historical tape. If after months of analysis you have found common ground to your solution and you are meeting your SLA - then improve your VTL solution and transition physical tape to third tier storage solution, or Lanfree -or special projects.
If you have found that tape has been better in the past - then you should concentrate on making VTL perform as best as possible - and then accept it. Each vendor has a VTL package, a sales pitch and support levels. The all have the common direction for disk vs tape. Do whats best for your customer base - and over time- if ROI of the original investment has failed - try again - make the past efforts goals for the next VTL solution/purchase.
Good Luck
