> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of McKown, John
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Hal Merritt
> >
> > Gee. Doesn't 'single point of failure' count for anything any more?
> > What happens when (not if) one of those tape goes bad or gets
> > destroyed?
> > That's one heckofa lot of data lost.
> >
> > I guess that means one might want to have more than one copy.
> > Two would be better. Gee. This solution is getting expensive.
> >
> > Just a thought.
>
> I agree. The original idea was to have ML2 in the VTS on
> virtual volumes. Then, once a day or two, we would take all
> the ML2 tapes in the VTS and stack them onto 3592 volumes
> using TapeCopy. At D.R. we would TapeCopy the ML2 data into
> the VTS at D.R. and use it for HSM. However, the complaint is
> that we have so much ML2 data that we could not actually test
> this in a 24 hour period. Oh, I did forget that we would
> disaster DUPLEX the ML2 tapes. One ML2 on site, on off-site.
> I would feel better with two offsite, but "oh, the cost!!!" I
> get the feeling that IT is just too expensive anymore.
> Another reason to go to Windows.
> They don't even pretend to be able to recover properly. Of at
> least, they've never proven it here.
With Windoze you don't need to waste time making backups. If something goes
kablooey you just buy a new PC and/or re-install Windoze, then re-create the
data and away you go.
-jc-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
