Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

2002-04-12 Thread Coviello, Paul

I 've read this, with much interest since we are looking at NAS
right now in a remote building, for DR purposes for one.
Would you know if this would be possible to do, in having the data
goto both tape and a NAS appliance offsite.

thanks
Paul

 -Original Message-
 From: Steve Harris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 7:25 PM
 To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject:  Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

 Can we have some details of your disk vendor and model?
 How has reliability been? Any disk failures?

 I have an IBM ESS here, but that is too expensive to waste on very large
 disk pools.

 Thanks

 Steve Harris
 AIX and TSM Admin
 Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia

  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/04/2002 22:48:27 
 Pat,

 We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown
 to 3TB (4 expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid
 5), we just keep adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage.
 We use a small LTO library for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to
 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The TSM database is 10GB sitting on
 raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also defrag the DB monthly.
 This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the blink of a
 eye. I run the TSM server  by myself as a part-time duty.

 I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at
 least 1 TB to keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data
 to migrate to your existing tape library. Now a days disks have both a
 performance and price advantage over tape.

 If you have any other question please let me know.

 john
 Synovus
 Columbus, GA
 --

 Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400
 From:Patrick J. Kelleher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

 We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library.
 Before
 replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using
 Disk in place of tape for all backups.

  Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in
 Tape Library.

 --



 **
 This e-mail, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential
 and for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). This confidentiality
 is not waived or lost if you receive it and you are not the intended
 recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/ received in error.

 Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review
 of this e-mail is prohibited.  It may be subject to a statutory duty of
 confidentiality if it relates to health service matters.

 If you are not the intended recipient(s), or if you have received this
 e-mail in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by
 telephone or by return e-mail.  You should also delete this e-mail
 message and destroy any hard copies produced.
 **



Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

2002-04-11 Thread John Underdown

Pat,

We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown to 3TB (4 
expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid 5), we just keep 
adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. We use a small LTO library 
for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The 
TSM database is 10GB sitting on raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also 
defrag the DB monthly. This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the 
blink of a eye. I run the TSM server  by myself as a part-time duty.

I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at least 1 TB to 
keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data to migrate to your existing 
tape library. Now a days disks have both a performance and price advantage over tape.

If you have any other question please let me know.

john
Synovus
Columbus, GA
--

Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400
From:Patrick J. Kelleher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. Before
replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using
Disk in place of tape for all backups.

 Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in
Tape Library.

--



Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

2002-04-11 Thread Kovacs, Mark

John,

How many versions do you keep and how does reclamation happen, if it
does ?  We are interested in setting up something like this and would like
to know more of the pros and cons.  We've seen prior conversations about
issues on reclamation.

Any and all information would be appreciated.

thanks,
mark

-Original Message-
From: John Underdown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 8:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools


Pat,

We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown to
3TB (4 expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid 5),
we just keep adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. We use
a small LTO library for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to 100 GB
total) nightly and growing. The TSM database is 10GB sitting on raid 10 with
15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also defrag the DB monthly. This is a dream
setup and works very well, restores run in the blink of a eye. I run the TSM
server  by myself as a part-time duty.

I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at
least 1 TB to keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data to
migrate to your existing tape library. Now a days disks have both a
performance and price advantage over tape.

If you have any other question please let me know.

john
Synovus
Columbus, GA
--

Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400
From:Patrick J. Kelleher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. Before
replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using
Disk in place of tape for all backups.

 Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in
Tape Library.

--



Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

2002-04-11 Thread Steve Harris

Can we have some details of your disk vendor and model?
How has reliability been? Any disk failures?

I have an IBM ESS here, but that is too expensive to waste on very large disk pools.

Thanks

Steve Harris
AIX and TSM Admin
Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/04/2002 22:48:27 
Pat,

We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown to 3TB (4 
expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid 5), we just keep 
adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. We use a small LTO library 
for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The 
TSM database is 10GB sitting on raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also 
defrag the DB monthly. This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the 
blink of a eye. I run the TSM server  by myself as a part-time duty.

I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at least 1 TB to 
keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data to migrate to your existing 
tape library. Now a days disks have both a performance and price advantage over tape.

If you have any other question please let me know.

john
Synovus
Columbus, GA
--

Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400
From:Patrick J. Kelleher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools

We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. Before
replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using
Disk in place of tape for all backups.

 Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in
Tape Library.

--



**
This e-mail, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential 
and for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). This confidentiality 
is not waived or lost if you receive it and you are not the intended 
recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/ received in error.  

Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review 
of this e-mail is prohibited.  It may be subject to a statutory duty of 
confidentiality if it relates to health service matters.

If you are not the intended recipient(s), or if you have received this 
e-mail in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by 
telephone or by return e-mail.  You should also delete this e-mail 
message and destroy any hard copies produced.
**