There is no magnetic media that is so reliable and/or indestructible that it is safe to have only 1 copy. Period. All my customers are making 2nd copies. And I actually saw a 3494 (yes, it was ill) smash a 3590 tape cartridge a few months ago. The gripper failed, left the cartridge sticking partially out of a drive. Then the robot ran into it. Cartridge totalled. How you ever gonna explain the loss of 1.5 TB (after compression) on a 3592 cartridge, if it happens? Now, that sort of thing happens so rarely that it is not worth keeping a 2nd onsite copy; the copypool/DR copy is stored offsite and can be retrieved if necessary to rebuild a damaged cartridge. But, you gotta have a 2nd copy of the data, somewhere. ________________________________
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Keith Arbogast Sent: Fri 2/2/2007 11:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Writing to copy pools on 3584? We are starting the process of replacing our 3494 tape library. It has ten 3590-E1A drives, about 2,500 cartridges, and supports two TSM servers. We have had preliminary talks with IBM about the 3584 ATL and 3592- E05 drive technologies. A technical rep told us, more or less, "No one is making copy pools with this new technology. They do not copy tapes from primary storage pools to a copy pool." I would never consider this with our current tape technology, so it will be a giant leap of faith to stop creating them no matter how good the new technology is. However, people of my generation who think objects that look like bombs might really be bombs are heaped with ridicule by those who know they are merely cartoon characters. Is this truly what most organizations are doing who use 3584 ATL's and 3592-E05 drives? We would be grateful to hear what others are doing, and their reasons for stopping or not stopping writing to copy pools? Thank you, Keith Arbogast Indiana University
