On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:54:50 +0200, R.S. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mark Zelden wrote: >> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:37:50 -0500, Joel C. Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Every time you mount a tape there is a small but non-zero probability >>> that the tape will be physically or logically damaged by a drive (or by >>> an Operator or robot mishandling the tape). >> >> Not with virtual tape (which is what we offload to on those LPARs that >> do offload SMF directly to tape). No mount delay either. However, >> occasional tape sharing allocation problems (MIM/MIA) have held up >> the SMF offload processing on those LPARs. > >Unless you have to do some disruptive maintenance on your STK VTCS. >
With virtually 100% of our tape environment using virtual tape (no pun intended), that type of work is done when systems can be "quiesced". Besides, that we have redundancy in our virtual tape environment. The only thing that uses native tape is HSM and TSM. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/ Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
