Radoslaw Skorupka: >a) remote copy, like PPRC-XD, HUR, SRDF/A - all those require same >vendor, since HDS won't talk to IBM or EMC. Unfortunately this is not an >option.
That's a bit too pessimistic, I think. IBM and Hitachi Vantara both support Metro Mirror (PPRC). See here for Hitachi Vantara's whitepaper (October, 2016): https://www.hitachivantara.com/en-us/pdf/white-paper/mainframe-storage-compatibility-and-innovation-with-hitachi-vsp-g1000-whitepaper.pdf If the fiber distance is about 150 Km, that's "far-ish" but not automatically too far for these purposes. Whether a Metro Mirror-based storage migration is viable will depend on the workloads (and their storage I/O characteristics) that must run during the final pre-cutover preparation stages, and the minimum required service levels for those workloads. In many cases you can pick a "quiet" time, and the migration would be viable. If the fiber distance poses a challenge for a Metro Mirror-based storage migration, even for "quiet time" workloads, then another technically possible Metro Mirror-based approach is to deploy a "staging" storage unit (perhaps an off lease/refurbished, temporarily vendor-supplied, older model unit that's "good enough" for the short-term mission) at a shorter fiber distance to handle the cross-vendor transition, then leapfrog asynchronously from there. z/OS Basic HyperSwap could be in the picture. Please talk with the storage vendors, of course, to get their viewpoints. I'm merely providing some hypotheticals. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy Sipples IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM Z and LinuxONE, AP/GCG/MEA E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
