I'm using Data Domain as the only dedup component.  Mgmt is balking at the cost 
additional disk or tape pools with TSM dedup and the highly desired "backup to 
non-dedup pool."  Our current tape technology is quite old and replacing with 
several new drives and library hardware isn't on the financial agenda.

We have Data Domain in two data centers.

A TSM pool on the DD is replicated to the alternate DD via DD replication.  It 
replicates the de-duped data, so latency/bandwidth is less of an issue.

An second TSM server will see the other DD as a Pool, or at least that's the 
plan.  Haven't fully tested yet.

Had to carefully define the Device Class to make sure the path name is 
identical on both ends.
Will have to stop DD replication, at least temporarily, to test it.

But, haven't tested yet.


-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of 
Sergio O. Fuentes
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 12:20 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Deduplication/replication options

Hello all,

We're currently faced with a decision go with a dedupe storage array or with 
TSM dedupe for our backup storage targets.  There are some very critical pros 
and cons going with one or the other.  For example, TSM dedupe will reduce 
overall network throughput both for backups and replication (source-side dedupe 
would be used).  A dedupe storage array won't do that for backup, but it would 
be possible if we replicated to an identical array (but TSM replication would 
be bandwidth intensive).  TSM dedupe might not scale as well and may 
neccessitate more TSM servers to distribute the load.  Overall, though, I think 
the cost of additional servers is way less than what a native dedupe array 
would cost so I don't think that's a big hit.

Replication is key. We have two datacenters where I would love it if TSM 
replication could be used in order to quickly (still manually, though) activate 
the replication server for production if necessary.  Having a dedupe storage 
array kind of removes that option, unless we want to replicate the whole 
rehydrated backup data via TSM.

I'm going on and on here, but has anybody had to make a decision to go one way 
or the other? Would it make sense to do a hybrid deployment (combination of TSM 
Dedupe and Array dedupe)?  Any thoughts or tales of woes and forewarnings are 
appreciated.

Thanks!
Sergio

[Confidentiality notice:]
***********************************************************************
This e-mail message, including attachments, if any, is intended for the
person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
or privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, or disclosure
is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
the sender and destroy the original message, including all copies,
Thank you.
***********************************************************************