Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools
Mark, Good point, what you may have heard being a problem was using Network Attached Storage (NAS) for TSM volumes, in which case TSM considers sequential media. i'm talking about using Direct Attached Storage (DAS). Since DAS is consider random access by TSM there is no need to do reclamation on the disk volumes. Expire Inventory reduces the size of the disk volumes automatically. ISCSI would also be seen as random access by TSM since it's block I/O and not file I/O like NAS. The pros are disks arrays are much cheaper than tape libraries and more reliable, everything runs faster, and much less maintenance. There's no cons to using disk for your backup pool except one and it's a big one, if you lose a 1TB array it's bear to restore from the copypool, especially in our case of having a small tape library. That's why i recommended Pat to keep his large tape library and just grow his disk storage. Our disk expansion cases (IBM Exp300's) use raid 5 and have plenty of hot spares with redundant everything and are plugged into two dedicated separate AC circuits. We have a number of Policy Domains ranging from 14 to 30 days retention period. i do use excludes heavily, especially apps that create large index files that have to be recreated after a restore anyway. If you have another questions please let me know. john -Original Message- Date:Thu, 11 Apr 2002 11:12:43 -0400 From:"Kovacs, Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools John, How many versions do you keep and how does reclamation happen, if it does ? We are interested in setting up something like this and would like to know more of the pros and cons. We've seen prior conversations about issues on reclamation. Any and all information would be appreciated. thanks, mark -Original Message- From: John Underdown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 8:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools Pat, We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown to 3TB (4 expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid 5), we just keep adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. We use a small LTO library for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The TSM database is 10GB sitting on raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also defrag the DB monthly. This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the blink of a eye. I run the TSM server by myself as a part-time duty. I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at least 1 TB to keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data to migrate to your existing tape library. Now a days disks have both a performance and price advantage over tape. If you have any other question please let me know. john Synovus Columbus, GA -
Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools
I 've read this, with much interest since we are looking at NAS right now in a remote building, for DR purposes for one. Would you know if this would be possible to do, in having the data goto both tape and a NAS appliance offsite. thanks Paul > -Original Message- > From: Steve Harris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 7:25 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools > > Can we have some details of your disk vendor and model? > How has reliability been? Any disk failures? > > I have an IBM ESS here, but that is too expensive to waste on very large > disk pools. > > Thanks > > Steve Harris > AIX and TSM Admin > Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/04/2002 22:48:27 >>> > Pat, > > We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown > to 3TB (4 expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid > 5), we just keep adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. > We use a small LTO library for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to > 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The TSM database is 10GB sitting on > raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also defrag the DB monthly. > This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the blink of a > eye. I run the TSM server by myself as a part-time duty. > > I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at > least 1 TB to keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data > to migrate to your existing tape library. Now a days disks have both a > performance and price advantage over tape. > > If you have any other question please let me know. > > john > Synovus > Columbus, GA > ------------------ > > Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400 > From:"Patrick J. Kelleher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools > > We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. > Before > replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using > Disk in place of tape for all backups. > > Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in > Tape Library. > > -- > > > > ** > This e-mail, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential > and for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). This confidentiality > is not waived or lost if you receive it and you are not the intended > recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/ received in error. > > Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review > of this e-mail is prohibited. It may be subject to a statutory duty of > confidentiality if it relates to health service matters. > > If you are not the intended recipient(s), or if you have received this > e-mail in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by > telephone or by return e-mail. You should also delete this e-mail > message and destroy any hard copies produced. > **
Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools
Can we have some details of your disk vendor and model? How has reliability been? Any disk failures? I have an IBM ESS here, but that is too expensive to waste on very large disk pools. Thanks Steve Harris AIX and TSM Admin Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/04/2002 22:48:27 >>> Pat, We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown to 3TB (4 expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid 5), we just keep adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. We use a small LTO library for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The TSM database is 10GB sitting on raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also defrag the DB monthly. This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the blink of a eye. I run the TSM server by myself as a part-time duty. I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at least 1 TB to keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data to migrate to your existing tape library. Now a days disks have both a performance and price advantage over tape. If you have any other question please let me know. john Synovus Columbus, GA -- Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400 From:"Patrick J. Kelleher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. Before replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using Disk in place of tape for all backups. Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in Tape Library. -- ** This e-mail, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential and for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). This confidentiality is not waived or lost if you receive it and you are not the intended recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/ received in error. Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review of this e-mail is prohibited. It may be subject to a statutory duty of confidentiality if it relates to health service matters. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or if you have received this e-mail in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by telephone or by return e-mail. You should also delete this e-mail message and destroy any hard copies produced. **
Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools
John, How many versions do you keep and how does reclamation happen, if it does ? We are interested in setting up something like this and would like to know more of the pros and cons. We've seen prior conversations about issues on reclamation. Any and all information would be appreciated. thanks, mark -Original Message- From: John Underdown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 8:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools Pat, We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown to 3TB (4 expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid 5), we just keep adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. We use a small LTO library for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The TSM database is 10GB sitting on raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also defrag the DB monthly. This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the blink of a eye. I run the TSM server by myself as a part-time duty. I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at least 1 TB to keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data to migrate to your existing tape library. Now a days disks have both a performance and price advantage over tape. If you have any other question please let me know. john Synovus Columbus, GA -- Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400 From:"Patrick J. Kelleher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. Before replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using Disk in place of tape for all backups. Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in Tape Library. --
Re: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools
Pat, We been using a all disk backuppool for a number of years now. It's grown to 3TB (4 expansion cabinets with 14 73GB drives each and each set to raid 5), we just keep adding disk expansion to server as we need more storage. We use a small LTO library for the copypool. We backup 360 servers (80 to 100 GB total) nightly and growing. The TSM database is 10GB sitting on raid 10 with 15K rpm drives (very fast) , i also defrag the DB monthly. This is a dream setup and works very well, restores run in the blink of a eye. I run the TSM server by myself as a part-time duty. I would suggest just growing your disks storage on your backuppool to at least 1 TB to keep backups and restore running fast, allowing older data to migrate to your existing tape library. Now a days disks have both a performance and price advantage over tape. If you have any other question please let me know. john Synovus Columbus, GA -- Date:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:32:20 -0400 From:"Patrick J. Kelleher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. Before replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using Disk in place of tape for all backups. Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in Tape Library. --
Using Disk in place of tapes for copy pools
We currently back up 500 GIG a night using an ATL 6000 tape library. Before replacing Tape Library we would like to research the possibility of using Disk in place of tape for all backups. Anyone doing this, especially on a large scale as we have 20 terabytes in Tape Library.
