We run RedHat exclusively (for Linux - all other *NIX are SUN boxes) and 
ALL of our TSM servers are RH4 or above using fibre-attached TS1120/1130 
drives.

There used to be issue with the IBM supplied tape drivers being kernel 
level dependent and we had to hold back on updating the OS until IBM 
driver folks caught up.  Now they supply the tape drivers as source and 
you do an rpmbuild.





From:
Steven Langdale <Steven.Langdale AT CAT DOT COM>
To:
ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date:
10/27/2009 01:47 PM
Subject:
Re: [ADSM-L] Performance and migration: AIX vs Linux
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>



Steve Raises a good point.  I've not used TSM on Linux for a couple of 
years now, but I do remember plenty of tape driver issues.

For those who have used it more recently, is it better? (btw Redhat Only 
shop here)

Thanks

Steven

Steven Langdale
Global Information Services
EAME SAN/Storage Planning and Implementation
( Phone : +44 (0)1733 584175
( Mob: +44 (0)7876 216782
ü Conference: +44 (0)208 609 7400 Code: 331817
+ Email: steven.langdale AT cat DOT com

 



Steven Harris <steve AT STEVENHARRIS DOT INFO> 
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
27/10/2009 00:09
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>


To
ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc

Subject
Re: [ADSM-L] Performance and migration: AIX vs Linux




Caterpillar: Confidential Green Retain Until: 26/11/2009 



Allen,

I see your point on the hardware side, but what about all the various
flaky driver issues with Linux.  Would it be reasonable to consider
Intel/Solaris to get an industrial strength OS on commodity hardware?
Where's AIX for Intel when you need it!

Regards

Steve

Steven Harris
AIX and TSM Admin.
STILL! Looking for work, Sydney Australia


Allen S. Rout wrote:
>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:57:20 +0330, Mehdi Salehi 
<iranian.aix.support AT GMAIL DOT COM> said:
>>>
>
>
>
>> According to IBM, AIX outperforms Linux on the same box between 5%
>> to 10%.  Maturity, flexibility and reliability of AIX and POWER
>> architecture in my opinion make it a far better choice for such a
>> critical service. (I am not against Intel)
>>
>
>
> I've been a big-time AIX booster for years, for just this reason.  But
> I've got to say, next generation I'm testing Intel/linux.
>
> The reason:
>
> 2x 4-core 3Ghz cpus,
> 72G of core
> 2x10G ethernet
> 2x4G FC
>
> for 7K plus a 1/16 share of a 50K chassis.  Call it 10K.
>
> It makes me sigh; I really like and trust AIX and p-series hardware.
>
>
> - Allen S. Rout
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.32/2459 - Release Date: 
10/25/09 19:57:00
>
>