Re: 3390s on SAN?
Ron, Thank you very much. That's precisely the type of info I needed. Thank You, Dave O'Brien NIH Contractor From: Ron Hawkins [ronjhawk...@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 10:03 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: 3390s on SAN? David, Firstly, I work for HDS. I'm assuming you mean that the VSP is the storage in the non-mainframe dept, and the aging HDS DASD is a 9980V or earlier controller. In order for the VSP to support CKD volumes you will need to install a FICON feature. This is two boards for a total of 16 FICON ports. These will take up two half slots in the controller, which means they can share the slot with a fibre channel board. You cannot define CKD volumes in the VSP unless there are FICON boards installed. I'm not sure what your capacity demands are, but if you are at less than 100,000 4KiB IOPS you should be OK with these boards using just two ports per board. The architecture change in the VSP means you need to be sure you have enough Virtual Storage Directors (VSD) to handle the total IO load though. VSD is a fancy name for Microprocessor Board - we don't put the MP on the Front or Back end cards any more. If the dark side is worried about sharing these you can assign CKD volumes and LUNs to different VSD so the activity is physically separated. That's not a recommendation, it's just something you can do to appease any concerns. CKD volumes are formatted into a whole parity group. A parity group can be 4xHDD (R5 3D+1P, R10 2D+2D), or 8xHDD (R5 7D+1P, R6 6D+2P). Then there is a method called concatenation that allows you to widen the RAID 10 stripe to 8xHDD, and the RAID 5 stripe to 16xHDD or 32xHDD. And finally there is a new facility called MF-HDP (Hitachi Dynamic Pooling) that can "chunk" a volume across up to 2KxHDD, where a chunk is 672 tracks. MF-HDP is supported on RAID-5 and RAID-6 (recommended). MF-HDP creates virtual volumes in a HDP Pool. The sum of the virtual volumes can be greater than the actual parity group(s), but I'd dredge up all my old Iceberg/RVA experience with Net Capacity Load before going that route. All the volumes in the pool are 3390-A (any size you want) so the Dynamic Volume Expansion method (DVE) is a simpler route than over provisioning. It's a simple thing to create a bucket load of standard size volumes in the pool - 15 minutes in the Storage Navigator GUI to create a couple of thousand volumes. (I love this in the lab). >From the small amount of info you gave it sounds like an investment in some FICON Boards, a few spindles and the MF-HDP setup and you could be up and running on the VSP. If there's any concern about running open and Mainframe in the same Global cache you can carve out a Cache Logical Partition (CLPR) for the CKD Parity Groups and the dark side will be none the wiser. Personally I don't see a problem with this, but the first four CLPR are free and it gives some people nice warm and fuzzy feelings. Just make it equal to the cache in your current HDS Controller and you'll be good. With dedicated VSD, CLPR, Channels and RAID Group it's a bit like a condo for MF and the dark side. You get your own apartment, kitchen, and bathroom, but you have to share the corridors, lift and stairs :-) And you may want to check your current disk activity rates before jumping straight into 600GB drives. You don't want reduce 64x73GB HDD to 8x600GB HDD and find you're stalling because you need to handle 2000 read cache misses a second. SSD would make that no-brainer, but they are expensive. Good Luck Ron > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of > O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 7:53 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: [IBM-MAIN] 3390s on SAN? > > There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our non- > mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. > > Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? > We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array > needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. > I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably not > using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. > Are my assumptions correct? > Thank You, > Dave O'Brien > NIH Contractor > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to > lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with th
Re: 3390s on SAN?
David, Firstly, I work for HDS. I'm assuming you mean that the VSP is the storage in the non-mainframe dept, and the aging HDS DASD is a 9980V or earlier controller. In order for the VSP to support CKD volumes you will need to install a FICON feature. This is two boards for a total of 16 FICON ports. These will take up two half slots in the controller, which means they can share the slot with a fibre channel board. You cannot define CKD volumes in the VSP unless there are FICON boards installed. I'm not sure what your capacity demands are, but if you are at less than 100,000 4KiB IOPS you should be OK with these boards using just two ports per board. The architecture change in the VSP means you need to be sure you have enough Virtual Storage Directors (VSD) to handle the total IO load though. VSD is a fancy name for Microprocessor Board - we don't put the MP on the Front or Back end cards any more. If the dark side is worried about sharing these you can assign CKD volumes and LUNs to different VSD so the activity is physically separated. That's not a recommendation, it's just something you can do to appease any concerns. CKD volumes are formatted into a whole parity group. A parity group can be 4xHDD (R5 3D+1P, R10 2D+2D), or 8xHDD (R5 7D+1P, R6 6D+2P). Then there is a method called concatenation that allows you to widen the RAID 10 stripe to 8xHDD, and the RAID 5 stripe to 16xHDD or 32xHDD. And finally there is a new facility called MF-HDP (Hitachi Dynamic Pooling) that can "chunk" a volume across up to 2KxHDD, where a chunk is 672 tracks. MF-HDP is supported on RAID-5 and RAID-6 (recommended). MF-HDP creates virtual volumes in a HDP Pool. The sum of the virtual volumes can be greater than the actual parity group(s), but I'd dredge up all my old Iceberg/RVA experience with Net Capacity Load before going that route. All the volumes in the pool are 3390-A (any size you want) so the Dynamic Volume Expansion method (DVE) is a simpler route than over provisioning. It's a simple thing to create a bucket load of standard size volumes in the pool - 15 minutes in the Storage Navigator GUI to create a couple of thousand volumes. (I love this in the lab). >From the small amount of info you gave it sounds like an investment in some FICON Boards, a few spindles and the MF-HDP setup and you could be up and running on the VSP. If there's any concern about running open and Mainframe in the same Global cache you can carve out a Cache Logical Partition (CLPR) for the CKD Parity Groups and the dark side will be none the wiser. Personally I don't see a problem with this, but the first four CLPR are free and it gives some people nice warm and fuzzy feelings. Just make it equal to the cache in your current HDS Controller and you'll be good. With dedicated VSD, CLPR, Channels and RAID Group it's a bit like a condo for MF and the dark side. You get your own apartment, kitchen, and bathroom, but you have to share the corridors, lift and stairs :-) And you may want to check your current disk activity rates before jumping straight into 600GB drives. You don't want reduce 64x73GB HDD to 8x600GB HDD and find you're stalling because you need to handle 2000 read cache misses a second. SSD would make that no-brainer, but they are expensive. Good Luck Ron > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of > O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 7:53 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: [IBM-MAIN] 3390s on SAN? > > There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our non- > mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. > > Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? > We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array > needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. > I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably not > using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. > Are my assumptions correct? > Thank You, > Dave O'Brien > NIH Contractor > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to > lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3390s on SAN?
Dave, You just went outside my knowledge base - I know nothing about the VSP. This should be an easy question for HDS to answer. Does the box already have FICON in it? Will you be taking the entire array or just a portion of it for the mainframe? I know that on older HP/HDS disk arrays each "marketing raid group" needed to be either MF or UNIX/Windows (I hate the term "open systems"), but the entire box didn't need to reconfigured to move storage from one emulation to the other. Also the older arrays had different cards for ficon versus fibre channel. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 10:03 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: 3390s on SAN? To answer the question posed by Radoslav and Rex: Hitachi VSP system It currently has 600GB 10K RPM SAS disks in it. Thank You, Dave O'Brien NIH Contractor From: Pommier, Rex R. [rex.pomm...@cnasurety.com] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 10:13 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: 3390s on SAN? I have a really basic question to ask back to you regarding this. What storage are you going to? That simple question makes a huge difference. Another question is what is your definition of an 'array'? To an IBM disk subsystem, an array (at least on the DS6800 it was) is a set of disks within the subsystem. In my vocabulary, an array IS the subsystem. I've had subsystems from EMC, HP/Hitachi, and IBM in my shop within the past several years. They've all been "array"s. On the IBM DS array, I had arrays within the array. :-) Rex The information contained in this e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited and that you will be held responsible for any such unauthorized activity, including liability for any resulting damages. As appropriate, such incident(s) may also be reported to law enforcement. If you received this e-mail in error, please reply to sender and destroy or delete the message and any attachments. Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3390s on SAN?
To answer the question posed by Radoslav and Rex: Hitachi VSP system It currently has 600GB 10K RPM SAS disks in it. Thank You, Dave O'Brien NIH Contractor From: Pommier, Rex R. [rex.pomm...@cnasurety.com] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 10:13 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: 3390s on SAN? > There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our > non-mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. > > Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? > We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array > needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. > I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably > not using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. > Are my assumptions correct? I have a really basic question to ask back to you regarding this. What storage are you going to? That simple question makes a huge difference. Another question is what is your definition of an 'array'? To an IBM disk subsystem, an array (at least on the DS6800 it was) is a set of disks within the subsystem. In my vocabulary, an array IS the subsystem. I've had subsystems from EMC, HP/Hitachi, and IBM in my shop within the past several years. They've all been "array"s. On the IBM DS array, I had arrays within the array. :-) Rex The information contained in this e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited and that you will be held responsible for any such unauthorized activity, including liability for any resulting damages. As appropriate, such incident(s) may also be reported to law enforcement. If you received this e-mail in error, please reply to sender and destroy or delete the message and any attachments. Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3390s on SAN?
> There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our > non-mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. > > Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? > We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array > needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. > I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably > not using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. > Are my assumptions correct? I have a really basic question to ask back to you regarding this. What storage are you going to? That simple question makes a huge difference. Another question is what is your definition of an 'array'? To an IBM disk subsystem, an array (at least on the DS6800 it was) is a set of disks within the subsystem. In my vocabulary, an array IS the subsystem. I've had subsystems from EMC, HP/Hitachi, and IBM in my shop within the past several years. They've all been "array"s. On the IBM DS array, I had arrays within the array. :-) Rex The information contained in this e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited and that you will be held responsible for any such unauthorized activity, including liability for any resulting damages. As appropriate, such incident(s) may also be reported to law enforcement. If you received this e-mail in error, please reply to sender and destroy or delete the message and any attachments. Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3390s on SAN?
W dniu 2012-01-26 16:52, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] pisze: There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our non-mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably not using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. Are my assumptions correct? It's quite difficult to answer, because you haven't provided us details required to do it. 1. You wrote about 3390's on this storage. There are very few mainframe (CKD) compatible manufacturers - what the model is? 2. Assuming your dasd box is really able to emulate 3390's it should also be able to have FICON or ESCON channels. Caution: be able <> you have it. For example HDS/HP arrays have different cards for FC and for FICON. From the other hand IBM ESS used the same cards for both protocols. 3. If the dasd box is NOT mainframe compatible you cant still use it by using Luminex of BusTech appliance. Don't expect to high performance. BTW: SAN. Your ESCONs and FICONs and directors are SAN. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- Tre tej wiadomoci moe zawiera informacje prawnie chronione Banku przeznaczone wycznie do uytku subowego adresata. Odbiorc moe by jedynie jej adresat z wyczeniem dostpu osób trzecich. Jeeli nie jeste adresatem niniejszej wiadomoci lub pracownikiem upowanionym do jej przekazania adresatowi, informujemy, e jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie lub inne dziaanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i moe by karalne. Jeeli otrzymae t wiadomo omykowo, prosimy niezwocznie zawiadomi nadawc wysyajc odpowied oraz trwale usun t wiadomo wczajc w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku. This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorised to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive. BRE Bank SA, 00-950 Warszawa, ul. Senatorska 18, tel. +48 (22) 829 00 00, fax +48 (22) 829 00 33, www.brebank.pl, e-mail: i...@brebank.pl Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2012 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci wpacony) wynosi 168.410.984 zotych. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3390s on SAN?
Q1: Does it natively support Mainframe volumes via ESCON / FICON. Yes. Delete all Open Systems volumes, LCUs, etc, then define them as mainframe LCUs, RAID-5, Volumes. No. Get an luminex adapter. I uses emulates mainframe volumes and stores them on SAN attached Open Systems volumes. Also does VTAPE volumes. http://www.luminex.com/products/channel_gateway/why_channel_gateway.php On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:52 AM, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] wrote: > There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our > non-mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. > > Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? > We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array > needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. > I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably > not using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. > Are my assumptions correct? > Thank You, > Dave O'Brien > NIH Contractor > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3390s on SAN?
On 01/26/2012 09:52 AM, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] wrote: There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our non-mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably not using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. Are my assumptions correct? Thank You, Dave O'Brien NIH Contractor With nothing having been said about the existing type of non-mainframe SAN storage... It's not just a question of raw DASD storage, but whether the existing SAN hardware has the smarts to drive mainframe ESCON or FICON channel interfaces and whether it is able to support the 3990 controller and 3390 CKD disk device geometries and protocols, as these are all radically different from typical non-mainframe disk interfaces. Assuming that the hardware can support these requirements, if it was never originally configured with a mainframe in mind the odds are it will not have any mainframe channel interfaces installed, and at a minimum some hardware upgrade will be required for that. I'm pretty sure IBM disk subsystems that support mix of SAN and mainframe storage require each entire physical array to be allocated to only one of those functions. -- Joel C. Ewing,Bentonville, AR jcew...@acm.org -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3390s on SAN?
Well, you have to move out enough data to cover the number of TB that you're reconfiguring. For the most part, the Rank/array has to have enough contiguous data to carve out the volumes. In other words, if you want to carve out 1 TB of mod-9 volumes, then you have to have 1 tb of contiguous free space on the rank. As for ease to get this done, that depends on the level of microcode that's on your box. I know that currently, some very large volumes can be created but I don't know how this relates to the amount of space on a rank. Thanks, Hervey Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 10:53 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: 3390s on SAN? There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our non-mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably not using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. Are my assumptions correct? Thank You, Dave O'Brien NIH Contractor -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
3390s on SAN?
There is an internal proposal to carve several TB of dasd from one of our non-mainframe depts. And use it to replace our aging HDS DASD. Question: How easy/difficult is this to accomplish? We re-configured an array from 3390 mod-3s to mod 27/50s but the entire array needed to be cleared of data. I'm assuming the same will be true in this case. I'm also assuming that the disks will need to be re-modeled (I am probably not using the correct terminology) to be mainframe compliant. Are my assumptions correct? Thank You, Dave O'Brien NIH Contractor -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
