I would tread very lightly at "sharing drives", but not sharing libraries.
Documentation on partitioning library cats, tapes and drives using
3494/3590 setups should be followed as in the red books. However, don't
believe you'll be all fine and dandy sharing drives.
While we do not have the same setup as you, we have been working on a
similar config: we have 6 Sun E6500s fibre attached to a connectrix switch
and then via SAN Datagateways to the 3590Es (16 in one 3494). We JUST
loaded the 4.0.3.5 driver code for the 3590Es that better supports JNI FC
HBAs on SBUS using SAN DGs. We've been through the following TSM server
code: 3.7.2, 3.7.2.2, 3.7.3.0, 3.7.3.6, 3.7.3.7. Only the last code
actually "works" and we're not even sure that it REALLY works yet.
It's funny because IBM has stated that 3590 drive sharing in 3494's has
been available since 9/99. It really was NOT available until 3.7.3, but it
has not worked until 3.7.3.7. If you aren't using a switch but AL, you
might be better off but I don't know - doing dual attached drives, one via
SCSI and the other via SCSI->Bridge->FC might introduce interesting
side-effects. TESTING thoroughly is a must.
At this point it sounds like you want to partition and share your library,
and that is what the documentation discusses - not sharing tape devices.
We have long "shared libraries" and it works quite well. Simply let the
two systems talk to the library (they can both be lmcp0), but partition
your drives between systems and make sure your cats for each server are
different.
For us, tape sharing is a must and this one system will support 3 different
applications starting at about 1.8TB and expanding to 3.0TB per day. FC
makes it possible (along with the switch), but there is NO documentation
from IBM (3590 driver, TSM) on how to do this on various
platform/switch/bridge combos. If you go that route, talk to someone who
has done it on your type system first, you'll save alot of time and
headaches. And, I'm still not convinced IBM has implemented code that
WORKS after almost a year.
Thanks,
David Hendrix
dmhendri AT fedex DOT com
Fred Johanson <fred AT MIDWAY.UCHICAGO DOT EDU>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 07/21/2000
01:42:39 PM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject: Sharing 3494
I know Friday afternoon isn't the best time to ask something big, but here
goes anyway...
Our current ADSM server is full and our new server is on the floor and
almost ready to put into service. The setup is as follows:
Current ADSM server:
RISC/6000 AIX 4.3.2
ADSM 3.1.2.57
3494 via scsi
6 3590E scsi (twin tailed?)
New TSM server:
SP2 AIX 4.3.3
TSM 3.7.3
3494 via fibre channel and SAN Data gateway
6 3590E scsi (twin tailed?)
The documentation for having two machines use the same 3494 (the new
redpiece and the 1996 redbook) is making its way around the
office. Opinion is split on what the documentation actually says; some
understand it that we can setup the 3494 on the new server as a shared
device and let the existing definitions stand; others read it to mean that
we must partition the 3494 between the two systems, assigning some drives
to one server and some to the other, while dividing the tapepool at some
arbitrary place.
I'm not sure if it's relevant to the discussion, but "lsdev -Cc tape" on
the new machine shows the robot and all six drives as available, and "mtlib
-l /dev/lmcp0 -M tape#" mounts a volume.
Any guidance from anyone who has already faced this problem will be greatly
Any guidance from anyone who has already faced this problem will be greatly
appreciated.
Fred Johanson
System Administrator, ADSM
S.E.A.
University of Chicago
773-702-8464
|
