Don,

I'm can't speak for the EMC and IBM iterations, but with HDS HDP setting up
mirrored configurations is just way to easy. I'm guessing it would be
similarly easy on the other vendors wide stripe configurations.

It's not exactly what you are asking for, but in the lab we are setting up
and tearing down remote copy configurations all the time. One day it's
3390-9 and the next day it is 3390-A fill size. The pools themselves remain
the same, it's just a case of defining the new volumes in the pool, and
growing/shrinking the pool as necessary. When finished you just delete the
volumes and create new ones of whatever size you want. 

It's not the nirvana of a self-replicating configuration, but it's is far
easier than the old days of reformatting arrays, or deleting and creating
custom volumes in the middle of a parity group or looking for small
leftovers at the end of a parity group.

Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Don Williams
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 2:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Mod-9 vs. Mod-27 vs. mixed

I think DASD vendors need to create a simple, standard method to mirror a
volume's configuration and data, rather than mirroring just the volume's
data.

Don

> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] 
> On Behalf Of Skip Robinson
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 3:40 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Mod-9 vs. Mod-27 vs. mixed
> 
> In the interest of frugality, I asked my storage guys some time ago to 
> allocate some tiny volumes for JES checkpoint and couple data sets.
> After
> a while, they complained that it was more trouble than it was worth 
> because we mirror most volumes to the DR site. For every tiny source 
> volume, they needed a corresponding tiny mirror volume. Periodic DASD 
> refresh (aka upgrade) projects only added to the complexity. Pennies 
> vs.
> pounds.
> 
> .
> .
> JO.Skip Robinson
> Southern California Edison Company
> Electric Dragon Team Paddler
> SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
> 626-302-7535 Office
> 323-715-0595 Mobile
> [email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> From:   "Staller, Allan" <[email protected]>
> To:     [email protected],
> Date:   02/22/2013 10:04 AM
> Subject:        Re: Mod-9 vs. Mod-27 vs. mixed
> Sent by:        IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-
> [email protected]>
> 
> 
> 
> Space wasted for "small volumes" e.g. XCF couple datasets. Just a 
> talking point. With Hyper-PAV, etc. most of the other points are just 
> "hot air".
> 
> The convenience of not having to support multiple "geometries".
> 
> <snip>
> A client with DS8000 DASD configured as a mix of 3390 Mod9 and Mod27s 
> is considering a project to convert everything to Mod-27.  Does anyone 
> out there have some thoughts on the advantages or disadvantages of 
> this?
> I'm
> not looking to start a religious discussion or other "dinotribe," so 
> feel free to respond to me privately.  I'm just interested in 
> perspective and talking points, either way.
> </snip>
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

Reply via email to