ADSM-L

NT Server vs. HP-UX Server

2001-06-20 14:45:08
Subject: NT Server vs. HP-UX Server
From: Scott Foley <sfoley AT NETDOCUMENTS DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:46:09 -0600
Background:
We are currently using TSM 3.7 on HP-UX 11.0 to backup a large disk array
(900 Gig).  This array is connected to two 2000 series HP servers.  One
server runs TSM and the other acts as a file server for the disk array.  MC
service guard is also being used for fail over.

The disk array serves as data storage for a bunch of NT 4.0 servers.
Because of the way that these NT 4.0 servers access the data, we are needing
to replace the HP-UX front end with an NT cluster.  (Samba and NFS access
don't work effectively with our requirements)

Question:
We are planning on replacing the two HP-UX servers with two clustered Win
2000 Servers.  While I believe that HP-UX would be a better solution, would
it be worth the cost of retaining one HP-UX system simply for backups?  We
would then have an NT system sitting around doing nothing waiting for the
other NT system to fail, so the NT solution would not cost us anything extra
for TSM.  Because we would be keeping only one HP-UX system, we would also
lose the fail over capability if the server fails.

Thanks for any input,
Scott Foley
NetVoyage Corp.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>