List the tapes, excluding scratch tapes, including blocksize and number of blocks. For each tape, multiply these together to get the size of that tape. Sum up the size of all the tapes.
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Lizette Koehler <[email protected]> wrote: > The driving force is the Mgt team is familiar with NetBackup and Other Open > system software that does backup. They do not understand mainframe. > > I have been unsuccessful in explaining it is MORE THAN BACKUP on the > mainframe. And we cannot lose HSM Data unlike NetBackup. > > So that is the process driving the discussion. I am concerned I cannot > anticipate how much spinning disk they would need on the storage array to > replace a tape appliance for tape datasets. And HSM is our biggest > consumer. > > > Lizette > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of TonyIcloud-OPERA >> Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2014 9:04 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: General question on moving DFHSM work from mix TAPE/DASD to >> More DASD >> >> Yes, 1988. We had abundant spinning DASD since that's the only kind that > existed. >> It was a small MVS shop that IBM provided ($$) generously. >> >> Usual questions: >> 1. Do you have enough disk? No guessing allowed. >> 2. Is the tape mount scenario driving this plan? >> 2. Will it complicate your DR? >> 3. Will it complicate your routine non-DR backups? >> >> I know you asked that below but every shop has its own methods of backup > for DR >> and non DR. Without intimate knowledge of your current backup >> methods.......speculation. >> >> All in all I think it's an excellent idea, subject to niggling details of > course. >> >> >> >> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 22:42:38 -0500, Lizette Koehler > <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > We are z/OS V1.12 >> > >> > We are considering changing from a mix of Tape and Disk for HSM >> > functions. >> > >> > So ML2 would go away or be very reduced >> > ML1 would be expanded >> > BACKUP and ABARS would be directed to DASD. >> > >> > Has anyone done this? >> > >> > If so, what were some of the experiences? Did you find the increase >> > in dasd requirements were exponential? Or were they an easy slope >> > (that is not any quick growth) Did you find any issues with constantly >> > adding dasd? Or could you stabilize the HSM needs. >> > Did it provide better support for Business Recovery or Disaster > Recovery? >> > Any performance issues? >> > >> > Thanks for any input >> > >> > Lizette >> > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send >> > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> >> >> -- >> Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
