What you say is so true. However, even a 50% increase in time may not be a show-stopper for our shop, as opposed to running two complete backup jobs.
-----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Boyes Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 1:41 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: VM:Backup: Twinning Tapes to Remote Tape Unit > We are ramping up our Technical Recovery Plan, and intend to use > channel- extended tape units at a remote location when performing our > regular full and incremental backups. This approach lives and dies on the speed of the link to the remote drives. I ran this configuration a long time ago with parallel channel extenders to an offsite 3490 and it worked OK with a dedicated DS3 between the channel extenders. With modern drives, the bandwidth requirements will probably be higher. The time to get the write completed to the remote drive was measurable, however, and the backup time did increase by about 15-20%. Didn't matter much for that site (it was less than 100 3370s), but that might screw you for modern large disk.
