Networker

Re: [Networker] SAN Tape Drive / Storage / Host Connectivity

2003-04-14 05:09:22
Subject: Re: [Networker] SAN Tape Drive / Storage / Host Connectivity
From: Gaddy <xy.0815 AT GMX DOT NET>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 05:09:37 -0400
We have tested last week
Qlogic new SANsurfer (SANBlade Manager) V2.0.24
and (IMHO) persistent binding works perfectly
(altough it seems that this is
the 1st working version ever for Win*)

But persistent binding has not been any help
in our Windows NetWorker environment :-(
With persistent binding you'll able to bind
WWPNs to SCSI-addresses (that's what it is made for)
NetWorker unfortunately uses DriveNames
in the form of "\\.\TapeX", and Windows
will generate these names independently
from SCSI adresses
(i.e.: if you lose one tape, after reboot
  the SCSI adresses are still O.K.,
  but the "\\.\TapeX"-names may have changed)


and now back to the basic thread.

1st I agree with TL, that there is no need for
  specialised Tape-SANs

2nd as almost, it depends if it will be a good
  choice to add some HBAs for more devices on the SAN

as mentioned above, we've done some testing last week
 to overcome these "recomendations":

 environment: IBM ESS, McData6064, IBM LTO3584, QLA2200F

we've tested 3 reasons to add more HBAs:
1) performance issues
  with LTO-2 and ESS it seems to be likely, that one could
  get more then 50 MB/sec write I/O to the tape, if the same
  adapter must handle read I/O there seems to be a bottlenek
  (which of course could be solved with 2Gbps HBAs)
2) configuration issues
  IBM "recommends" different setups for "ESS-HBAs" and
  "LTO-HBAs" (FC-taps support, retry counter, ...)
  <but we have decided to use a mix instead, and it works
   perfectly>
3)possible interactions between disk- and tape-addressing
  during the tests we haven't found any interactions,
  adding / removin ESS-disks will not influence tape addressing
  unfortunately "persistent binding" will not solve our
  "\\.\TapeX"-addressing problem

Finaly we've decided to go with TWO and not 3 or 4!

Anyone solved the "\\.\TapeX"-problem in a W2K environment?


Steffen Gattert
--
MOMENTUM Systech - Hamburg, Germany

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=