Actually we only have home written tape management system therefor it is not easy for us migrate from current vts to other tapeless solution. Anyone heard about innovation tapecopy I think it can help On 2011-12-29 上午9:17, "Russell Witt" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
