FWIW, When you upgrade to 6.1, your TSM server will be running Websphere (for the ISC) and DB2, plus TSM.
I think your current way of "stacking" via LPARs is a better choice. W On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Shawn Drew < shawn.d...@americas.bnpparibas.com> wrote: > All of this depends on the amount of data involved, not the number of > nodes. We have some TSM instances with 50 nodes that finish their backups > by 3AM or so. and all the house-keeping finishes by 6AM. > > > Regards, > Shawn > ________________________________________________ > Shawn Drew > > > > > > Internet > rrho...@firstenergycorp.com > > Sent by: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > 09/18/2009 11:49 AM > Please respond to > ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > To > ADSM-L > cc > > Subject > Re: [ADSM-L] TSM architecture > > > > > > > Our TSM servers are busy around the clock. In fact, 6am-noon is some of > the busiest with migrations going on. > > > > > > > > > "Haberstroh, > Debbie (IT)" > <habe...@voughtai To > RCRAFT.COM> ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Sent by: "ADSM: cc > Dist Stor > Manager" Subject > <ads...@vm.marist TSM architecture > .EDU> > > > 09/18/2009 11:36 > AM > > > Please respond to > "ADSM: Dist Stor > Manager" > <ads...@vm.marist > .EDU> > > > > > > > Hi All, > > My current environment is TSM 5.5.3, 1 library manager, 3 database > servers. > These are installed on a P550 AIX 5.3 system in separate LPAR's. We have > 355 clients, 200 + are active. My current TSM databases are 100GB, 65-82% > utilized. We are going to be doing a large business object installation > which will add 30-50 new clients including multiple Oracle databases. Our > proposal was to add an additional TSM server to handle the new > requirements. > > We have a new "architect" that is not very familiar with TSM and his > proposal is to "stack" TSM on another server that is running a different > application. His argument is that TSM does most of it's work at night and > the application (which one is TBD) does most of it's work during the day. > From what I know, due to TSM's resource utilization, it should be on it's > own hardware. > > Has anyone tried to do this and what were your results? I would love to > get some good arguments to take back that would support our original > position to install on separate hardware. Thanks to everyone for your > ideas. > > Debbie Haberstroh > TSM Server Administration > > > ----------------------------------------- > The information contained in this message is intended only for the > personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If > the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an > agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you > are hereby notified that you have received this document in error > and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of > this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete > the original message. > > > > This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for > the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, > please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord > with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, > is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the > integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) > not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Please note that > certain > functions and services for BNP Paribas may be performed by BNP Paribas RCC, > Inc. >