I have a lot of experience with Netbackup and TSM. What Alex has said here would be a common opinion of someone that fully understood and successfully implemented all of these products. Veritas would argue that Netbackup is capable of many more machines, but they do not tell you how they get there. The reality is they can handle about 10 to 50 machines of the type mentioned per media server (these would be comparable to a TSM server without a database, which does not exist as a TSM option or is needed). Netbackup can direct these from a common master server, but the database (if you could call it that) on the master really sucks wind when a hundred clients get going that have lots of files. With a Windows Master/Media server environment they simply cannot scale, do not even try it if you plan on implementing more than 50 total servers (couple terabytes). Duplication for offsite movement is really poor with Netbackup. In fact you cannot have more than one duplicate copy. The performance is really horrible if you use the multiplexing function. If you do not use the multiplexing function then you have to buy so much tape hardware it is pathetic. Basically, they recommend tape drives be installed on every server and running the media server code on each machine. The cost of this media server code is half the cost of a Master license if the system just saves itself, the same cost if it saves other servers.
I am guessing in Netbackup's early design the concept of a TSM type master server was never envisioned really. The issue was people needed a way to manage all the server backups each having their own dedicated tape hardware from a central tool. Netbackup does that well up to a point. This is what sells customers on the Netbackup product. In the days when servers had 30 GB saving the whole system weekly to send it offsite and because the data was not considered critical sending the backup from the week before offsite were acceptable implementations. 30GB could be saved in about 3 hours. Now, these 200 to 500GB servers with 1+M files hit and Netbackup has no hope of a full save for offsite, no way to consolidate incrementals for offsite disaster recovery restores, no way to duplicate for offsite storage. Enter TSM (actually before Netbackup). TSM is not for the meek. It is truly an enterprise class product. It is a storage management tool that does backup and restore functions. It takes advantage of its storage asset management using differential backup technologies and dramatically reducing the hardware requirements compared to classical full weekly backups with incrementals during the week. I would like to emphasize differential backup technologies. Subfile backup as an example. Never more than one copy of a version of a file unless you force it to do it. Now, Database servers are a different story. Here the numbers of files become a non-issue. Until SAN managed tape was available and the TSM SAN Managed Client you had to put the TSM server on every large machine so that you could attach direct tape. Well, that created somewhat of a more complex environment, but TSM had some capabilities to manage all the servers from a central server. The SAN Managed Client has put Veritas in a predicament in recent sales opportunities. TSM is now drastically cheaper in these large environments to operate because of the reduced hardware in comparison. Remember though what TSM was originally created to do, save PC desktops and manage hundreds/thousands of them. So, from the ground up scalability was never an issue. The problem was they were slow to recognize and deliver the server agents/clients because IBM did not acknowledge applications were a distributed thing. Now, application support is there for the most part. Tivoli has a few things to deliver to be whole. For core enterprise customers no matter whether they are HPUX, Windows, AIX, or Solaris only, TSM should be the product of choice. Why? Price, Functionality, Scalability, and understanding of Storage Management. Many of IBMs mainframe storage management people have moved to Tivoli in San Jose to support and develop TSM. Why, they have basically finished the job in the mainframe world and are taking all of this excellent technology, capability, and something more important, years of experience and lessons learned, in the behemoth mainframe world and delivering a superior solution for the Open Systems world. Yes, I did not answer the question of TSM vs Backup Exec. Again, it is like comparing a push scooter to an 18 wheeler. There is little in common other than both have some axles and wheels. Alex puts it in perspective pretty well. -----Original Message----- From: Alex Paschal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 5:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Need info on Tivoli v Backup Exec Think of backup environments as sorted by size. As a rough guesstimate, and I'm sure people have different opinions on sizing, NTBackup is for 1 machine. Backup Exec is good for 1-10, maybe even 20 machines. Veritas NetBackup is good for 10-50 machines. (Is anybody having a good time with it on larger implementations?) TSM is good for 20-50 machines. TSM is super for 50+ machines. Scale and application support will be your guide to choosing a backup solution. TSM is really an Enterprise solution with pretty good application support. One of my TSM servers (on AIX) is backing up 200 clients (which are actually various servers) for 2-4 TB per night over FastEthernet, ATM, GbE, and SP2 switch with very little hands-on management. I can't do that easily with any other product that I know of. Alex Paschal Storage Administrator Freightliner, LLC (503) 745-6850 phone/vmail -----Original Message----- From: Hugo Badenhorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 2:04 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Need info on Tivoli v Backup Exec Running WinNt and 2000 + SQL 6.5 , SQL 7 and SQL 2000 + Exchange 5.5 and 2000 Hugo Badenhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] +27 11 285 5587 +27 083 442 4958