On Aug 21, 2008, at 21:44 , Nick Laflamme wrote:
How common is it for sites to cluster TSM servers?
I know of some organizations that at one time or the other used to run TSM in a HACMP cluster. Most (if not all) decided that the current IBM p series hardware has so much built-in resilience (or redundancy) that hacmp only adds complexity without much benefits, esp in multi-CEC p570 systems. So yes, there used to be quite a few, and currently, well fewer and fewer. Hardware failure in a p5 system is so rarely fully service affecting that it's just not worth it. Now, remember it's only backups. You could possibly argue having a cold-standby TSM server on a remote location, running some automated db restore script that will allow you to get started again in very little time with a very short rpo, but HACMP or other fail-over clusters make no sense to me.
I'm looking for my next TSM position and have found at least one situation, perhaps two, where the would-be client wants TSM administrators who are familiar with CSM in an AIX/p-series environment. As far as I can tell, that implies setting up the TSM servers to fail-over so that if one fails, a hot-spare immediately covers for it. I've never heard of this, and I've worked in a couple of large, multi-TSM server environments. My working theory is that someone took an AIX administrator set of requirements as a template and didn't remove enough extraneous buzzwords, but if more sites than I realize are clustering TSM servers, I guess I should know that, too. Thanks, Nick
-- Met vriendelijke groeten, Remco Post [EMAIL PROTECTED]