Ron, I talked to the Architect for CA-Vtape and he indicated that there are some clients using SATA drives as their primary cache. They knew it would be a little slower, but were okay with the performance. So, it really depends on the performance you require of your Virtual Tape System.
Russell Witt CA 1 L2 Support Manager -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Hawkins Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 1:04 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Tapeless Solutions Russell, Thanks for your reply. I must admit to being somewhat VTAPE dumb, but your answer suggests that VTAPE is ready to take advantage of both internal slow drives and virtualized modular storage. With my Hitachi hat on perhaps I can see some low hanging fruit. Ron > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Russell Witt > Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 10:27 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Tapeless Solutions > > Ron, > > As a backstore device, yes. As the primary cache it might be a little slow. > That is what makes CA-Vtape a good solution for using different types > of hardware. And you can control how much expensive dasd is used for > cache by controlling how long data should remain cache-resident (and > it can be adjusted based on which sub-pool it is assigned too). > > Russell Witt > CA-1 L2 Support Manager > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Ron Hawkins > Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 4:58 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Tapeless Solutions > > Russell, > > Do you think that CA-Vtape would also be a good fit with large > capacity SAS/SATA array groups, or virtualized midrange storage arrays > presented as Mainframe volumes (3390A)? > > Ron > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > > Behalf Of Russell Witt > > Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 4:31 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Tapeless Solutions > > > > While the cache is MF DASD (which gives it great performance when > > writing and reading from cache), CA-Vtape now has the ability to be > > offloaded to cheaper dasd that is attached through an NFS Server > > (such as > NetApp or Data Domain). > > And you even have the flexability of having the offload copy go > > through data de-duplication (with Data Domain) and/or having a > > replicated off-site copy and still have a physical tape copy (or two). > > It allows for the client to decide which options are best for which > > types of > tape data. > > > > For example, backup data kept for DR purposes might be best on an > > NFS Server that is duplicated off-site at the DR location and kept > > for 2-4 weeks. But for data that needs to be kept for decades > > (regulatory > > requirements) it might be a lot more cost effective to have 2 > > phsyical high-capacity drives and stack a couple of tera-bytes of > > data on each cartridge for long-term storage. The nice thing about a > > software solution such as CA-Vtape is that it gives you many different > > options. > > > > If you want a truely "Tapeless Solution" and don't mind keeping > > un-used and un-referenced data on dasd for decades (not very "green" > > of you) then something like CA-Vtape with a replicated NFS Server as > > the backstore might be a very good option. Of course, if you are > > going tapeless, replication is very- much the recommended method. > > While the NFS Server itself could be off-site, having only a single > > copy of all backup data runs the risk of putting all the eggs in a single > > basket. > > Which is why tape backups have had a primary and duplex copy for > > decades. Putting both the primary and duplex copy into the same > > physical box kind of defeats the whole point of having 2 copies of > > the > backup data. > > > > But these are just my opinions. > > > > Russell Witt > > CA 1 L2 Support Manager > > > > > > On 12/19/11, R.S.<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > W dniu 2011-12-19 23:02, Henke, George pisze: > > > Will CA VTAPE work on regular MF or does it need the DS8800. > > > > What??? > > CA VTAPE is from software being sold by CA. DS8800 is a DASD box > > being sold by IBM. > > CA VTAPE works on any mainframe DASD. > > I don't know what does it mean "work on regular MF". > > > > BTW: IMHO it is very expensive solution. It consumes CPU cycles, > > especially when compression is on (could be offloaded to zIIP), and > > consumes mainframe DASD, which is usually the most expensive DASD. > > Exception: FBA DASD connected using "magic box" like BusTech MDL or > > Luminex, or other. ...but then you don't need VTAPE - those boxes > > also emulate tape units. > > > > My €0.02 > > > > -- > > Radoslaw Skorupka > > Lodz, Poland > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
