ADSM-L

Re: [ADSM-L] Tape or NFS? (DataDomain specifically)

2011-11-15 20:08:51
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Tape or NFS? (DataDomain specifically)
From: Nick Laflamme <dplaflamme AT GMAIL DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:02:23 -0600
Thanks for the answers, everyone. 

For what it's worth, the question wasn't so much to guide our own path; we're 
heavily invested in our SAN infrastructure and our VTL cards already. It was 
more an attempt to validate or refute what we were recently told by outside 
consultants. I was also looking for the current state of the art, not the 
history of this issue. 

Nick


On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:20 PM, Huebner,Andy,FORT WORTH,IT wrote:

> We run two DDs with VTL and 4 TSM servers.  I have had no real problems with 
> the setup.  The VTL cost was not an issue due to the AS/400 requiring it.  We 
> do push data to the systems faster than 10GbE, also our Ethernet network is 
> not built to handle the data load from where the TSM servers are to where the 
> DDs are located.  About 1 mile.
> With that said we are currently building a new TSM server that will use CIFS. 
>  In this case the network was built with DD in mind.
> Happiness may come from what is comfortable for you to manage.  For us it was 
> easier to transition to a VTL than to NFS.  It took about an hour to point 
> TSM to new tape pools. (4 months to move the data)
> DDs do have a stream limit, so we always build a disk pool in front to handle 
> the hundreds of incoming streams and to handle incoming data when the DD is 
> down for maintenance.
> 
> Andy Huebner
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf 
> Of Nick Laflamme
> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 6:45 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: [ADSM-L] Tape or NFS? (DataDomain specifically)
> 
> We've been told by consultants (these particular consultants shouldn't throw 
> stones) that DataDomain customers running TSM are far happier running NFS 
> than VTL, because DDRs are built primarily as file servers and the VTL 
> function is an add-on.
> 
> I can see the financial motive for staying with NFS (those VTL licenses 
> aren't cheap!), but I'm skeptical about the implication that there's a 
> functional or performance advantage to using NFS over VTL for a TSM server, 
> in our case on AIX.
> 
> Would anyone who's run both or chosen NFS care to comment? How much does it 
> depend on your infrastructure or your needs for LAN-free?
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>