Skip Sorry for being dense, but since we now have virtual dasd (RAID) and we now have ICF, has anyone done any current research to see if a re-evaluation of this process needs to be done?
I am just thinking that with the current dasd types, it maybe that things have changed a bit. We currently have 2 separate storage arrays for the mainframe. Our CFRM was on the alter array (5 miles away) as is our Logr. Both on different dasd devices on the remote array The Primaries for ARM, SFM, Sysplex and OMVS are on our primary Storage array. The primary storage array is attached to a z9. The remote to a z890. Now, would I not have issues with the primary CFRM and LOGR on the remote storage array? Would it not be better for them to be on the faster z9 and local to the z9? Also, what reports would I look at to verify whether or not they are placed correctly? Lizette > > In that same time frame (mid 90s), our primary CFRM was so busy that we > could not XRC mirror it. That's no longer true. But yes, three volumes are > the minimum IBM recommendation. Other that keeping the three named > primaries on separate volumes, all other couple data sets can apparently > be > placed anywhere. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
