Neale, Let's start off with take a deep breath and relax, now exhale!
I have been through the stonewalling and misdirection's of Tivoli for the past 6 years as well. I asked a question about the Client, which states no support for ReiserFS, not the server. I am using the z/VM server as a test bed because it takes weeks and paperwork to use the more robust z/OS server. To your point about DR, the current DR practices and procedures used here do not generally involve TAPE. All 70+T of dasd is synchronously remote mirrored. The use of TSM whether against a z/VM server or a z/OS server is for day to day backups of applications and data not DR. Having worked for a DR vendor and being in responsible for a DR plan at a bank (where we had to declare a disaster) I understand your issues with the product. Regards Phil Tully "Ferguson, Neale" wrote: > > Why would you want to do something like that? Why would you want to use the > z/VM server where you can use IUCV/Hipersockets to transfer data at > outrageous speeds instead of putting it out on some anorexic piece of wire? > What possessed you to leverage your investment in tape handling, current DR > practices, personnel, and procedures? Surely you realise this makes no sense > to do things where they're more cost effective! Don't you realise there's no > market for this type of scenario? > > Sorry I've been in enough Tivoli "Free-for-Alls" at SHARE to become > embittered. > > > -----Original Message----- > > Hello all, > > > > We have done some preliminary testing of the linux/390 TSM client on > > SLES7. The server is the z/VM ADSM server. In the documentation is > > states support for ext2 filesystems only. We have not found an issue > > with backing-up/restoring files on ReiserFS LVMs but wanted to know if > > there was any other user experience? > > > > Regards > > Phil Tully > >
