On Feb 1, 2008, at 12:44 PM, Gary Green wrote:
Okay... That makes perfect sense.
Sorry, but I missed the "number of tapes issue". Was that because
of the
quantity of SMF data from the vendors products or just keeping
their data
separate from all the rest?
--------------------SNIP--------------------------
It was just the shear number of tapes period. We were just running
out of tapes and place to keep them. We also needed to be able read
the tapes on a few minutes notices (going back at least a year)
because of auditors needs. Its a complicated story as to why and I
will explain if needed. Our DC spanned two floors and we had nowhere
to expand except to offsite. We managed to clear some space but that
was swallowed up by another CPU that was scheduled to come in within
a few months.
We also had cable restrictions (lengths) etc to worry about for the
tape drives, Looking back we should not given out the floor above but
it was impossible to get it back as the people who had it put their
own mini data center into it. We were busting at the seams. The floor
below (the tape library) was HVAC (for the DC and the entire
building) and that was untouchable.
Its a complicated story but it was a no win situation. We needed
todays technology back then.
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
