Re: HSM Backup to Disk
Moving HSM backup to disk is just one option we are looking at, we are also looking at VTS which I think is going to be the best solution for us. I was told by our DASD vendor that HSM is architected to use tape for backup, and using disk can be harder to manage. To implement a VTS would mean a simple recycle to get the 'real tape' backups to virtual tape, but I would still prefer to get the VTS on the floor a few months ahead if we can and let the tape backups fall off the end, then recycle what is left. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
HSM Backup to Disk
First off, I would like to say I am not an HSM expert, I am supporting HSM while a coworker is on medical leave. The company is looking to eliminate tape from the environment and I would like to know the best (or perhaps only) way to move HSM automatic backup from tape to disk. My feeling is we need to obtain the disk space needed well ahead of the elimination of tape, then set backups to go to disk instead of tape, and just let the tape backups drop off through attrition. There are some backups that we keep up to 200 days. Any other ideas? This is z/OS 2.2. Thanks -- Bob Heffner -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: OT: another z/OS sunsetted
I heard similar piffle at my former employer. We expect to be off the mainframe in 18-24 months. It ended up taking 12 years. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 3270 Emulators and consoles
x3270 on Linux. Had initial setup issues with fonts and screen size, but works well. Also have to remember to reboot Linux PC's after POR. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
zEC12 Performance Improvement
We implemented a zEC12 this past weekend, replacing a z10. The z10 was a 2097-504 and the zEC12 is a 2827-408 running z/OS 1.12. The major workload is DB2 V10. We have seen a dramatic drop in CPU utilization on the zEC12, as much as 50% in some cases. Has anybody else seen this kind of performance improvement moving to zEC12? This drop is an unexpected (but pleasant) surprise but we want to make sure we don't have a problem with our reporting. TIA, Bob Heffner -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
