we are using RAID5 in last 6 years as diskpools with no problems whatsoever we used SSA, now we are using SATA on DS4100
goran ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Stapleton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 3:22 PM Subject: Re: Using FILE instead of DISK devclass to avoid disk under-utilization From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bos, Karel
For normal backup data I like to use JBOD config. No read protection at all and maximum usable GB per disk. In order to minimize the number of storage pools needed, ITSM 5.3 has the collecation by group option.
There's a certain amount of sense there. What is the purpose of fault tolerance in a TSM disk storage pool? At the end of a process cycle, all customer data exists in at least three or four places: 1. on the client machine 2. in the disk storage pool (if you cache it) 3. on primary (onsite) tape 4. on copy (offsite) tape Is having fault tolerance for the disk pool really that necessary? Is yet a fourth (or fifth) level of redundancy worth it? I rarely find it so. Using JBOD for the disk pool gives you maximum utilization of disk space and eliminates the issues with RAID maintenance (either at OS level or the hardware level). I have had customers who have RAIDed disk catastrophes, and, believe me, running AUDIT VOL on dozens of disk volumes to clean up the mess afterward is a royal pain in the butt. I just never found it all that important. -- Mark Stapleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Senior TSM consultant
