On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 12:11 -0500, Tim Hare wrote: > VTS disk may be cheaper than online disk, but the the total cost of the > VSM box with DASD may not be cheaper than what we need to go to TMM, > especially since that DASD is "free" - it's capacity we already own but > don't use. I appreciate the point, however, and we'll try to see if we > can figure out which is cheaper for us.
I'm in agreement with what Kees said - and TMM is *not* $0. After much effort (years) one of my customers finally jumped from a large TMM implementation to (duplexed) VTSs. The DASD cost of TMM was about 30% of the installation - maybe more. The HSM (CPU) cost was also very high - in real chargeable mainframe M-thingies. And TMM pollutes the ML1 processing big time. And space management runs far more than should be necessary. TMM worked when it was introduced at this shop, but because it was "free" it grew too big, and was then too hard to cost-justify removing. Big motivator in the end was the dictate from above to reduce the cost of IT by lowering the cap on the machine. They finally went and worked out what all that HSM CPU time really cost. Shane ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
