ADSM-L

Re: ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec

1998-09-17 09:37:21
Subject: Re: ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec
From: "Burtenshaw, Barry L." <Barry.Burtenshaw AT STDREG DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 09:37:21 -0400
Jeff,

We are using both ADSM and Segate Backup Exec with the IBM ADSM Option.
Backup Exec is just used on our 3 NT Exchange servers.  Our other 150+ NT
servers use ADSM.  All of these NT servers backup to our remote ADSM server
which is currently running on a node of our SP2. Unfortunately, I can't tell
you why we decided to use Backup Exec or how it performs vs ADSM.  I'll have
to ask the NT guys.

The following is from the Seagate Backup Exec IBM ADSM Option manual:

"The Backup Exec IBM ADSTAR Distributed Storage Manager (ADSM) Options lets
you combine the speed and localized control of Backup Exec with the ADSM
policy-based system of centralized storage management.

The ADSM Option allows the ADSM server's storage resources to appear as a
tape autoloader in a list of target devices on the Backup Exec server.
Backup Exec administrators can then direct the output of any Backup Exec job
to the ADSM server simply by selecting the name of the ADSM autoloader as
the destination when submitting the job."

Barry

Barry L. Burtenshaw                                     Standard Register
Senior UNIX Systems Administrator       P.O. Box 1167
(937) 443-1737 direct                           Dayton, OH 45401-1167
(937) 586-6410 fax
(888) 742-9200 alpha page                       600 Albany Street
(888) 572-9740 numeric page                     Dayton, OH 45408

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Connor [SMTP:connorj AT NIMO DOT COM]
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 1998 17:01
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:      ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec
>
> Help!
>
>      There is a shift going on within our company where many Netware
> servers are being consolidated to larger NT servers.  A large number of
> these Netware soon to be NT servers are located in remote offices
> connected
> to our statewide ATM backbone via T1 lines.  The new NT servers in the
> remote offices will contain approximately 6 - 10 GB of user data.
> In most cases we were not planning on backing up the remote NT machines to
> a central ADSM server because it would take too long to restore an entire
> machine in a disaster recovery scenario.  This means, for the remote
> offices, local tape, probably a IBM 3570 library, would be used with the
> standalone version of ADSM.  We also thought we might backup the 3570
> storage pools to a central server for disaster protection.
>
>      Our current enviroment is ADSM for MVS v3 backing up 100 clients all
> within the Datacenter or close by.  Clients are AIX, SUN, HP, Windows NT
> (Lotus Notes Servers), and 1 Netware server.   ADSM has been in used to
> backup our UNIX servers for nearly 3 years.  Arcserve is currently used to
> backup the Netware servers using a DAT tape drive attached to each server.
> We standardized, or a least I thought we did, on using ADSM company wide
> about a year and a half ago.
>
>      Ok that's the background on to the problem.. A person from our
> distributed computing group informed me today that they have pretty much
> decided to go with Arcserve or Seagate Backup Exec to backup the remote
> office servers.  This decision was made without my involvement and
> shouldn't have been.. But that's a political issue.. The question I have
> for you good people is has anyone out there done a side by side comparison
> of the ADSM single server version versus Arcserve and/or Seagate Backup
> Exec? Any ammo you can give me that shows ADSM is the better choice would
> be GREATLY appreciated.  It is their feeling that ADSM is too slow and not
> widely used in the industry for backing up Windows NT or Netware.
>
>
> Thanks!
> Jeff Connor
> Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
> Syracuse NY