Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

[Longnecker, Dennis]

We did the same about 5 years ago.  Originally started using the DLM and Data 
Domain just for the mainframe data.  We also replicate to our cold site with a 
matching pair.   We started adding more Windows related data using SQL DD Boost 
and server Veeam backups to it. 

We absolutely zero performance issues on backups.   

We do see performance issues on Windows restores when it needs to reconstitute 
all the dedupped/compressed data such that it has me looking at alternatives.   
We do not see this issue on the mainframe data, just Windows.

Dennis

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Jake Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 10:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EMC DLM over IBM VTL


Hello

We are analysing if EMC DLM would be a right fit to replace IBM VTL.


I am trying to understand about backup cycles using EMC DLM when we use single 
backup solution and single virtual tape library to backup both mainframe and 
open systems.

Is there a possibility for contention ?
Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume 
for open system  ?

These performance do effect the open system as well ?

Trying to understand these from the DLM users ? Any feedback would be 
appreciated

Jake.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

[Michael Watkins]

Just curious, Carl: Is TCT implemented with DFSMShsm and DFSMSdss (and RACF) 
when using a PowerMax/DLm solution?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Carl Swanson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 11:40 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

First off, thank you for your kind words, really appreciate that.

One thing to note some recent announcements regarding DLm and PowerMax 
from Dell. Like IBM we now have Transparent Cloud Tiering (TCT), between the 
PowerMax and DLm. Like IBM we require our DASD and Virtual Tape product for 
this to work. One of the differences in this solution is that the connectivity 
between the PowerMax and DLm is we use FICON to move the data between the two 
systems.

Also, for quite awhile now the DLm has had the ability to move 
(migrate)  data from its data storage to another tier of storage (Cloud). This 
feature is referred to as Long Term Retention the DLm will move the data to and 
from the storage without any need for host cycles. Generally, we see customers 
looking at this feature for data that does not have high access patterns, 
generally like archive data or data that have not been accessed for a long 
period of time. The user can create the policy (usually last time the tape was 
mounted) that best meets their needs and the DLm will move that tape once the 
policy is meet. If the tape is needed the DLm will access the new location 
directly and the data will flow back to the mainframe. We do not recommend 
using this feature for data or tapes that have a high frequency of recall.

As to the tape management functions, we are different being a MTL. What 
will take place is a step will be added to the house keeping routine that will 
pass the daily or full scratch list to the DLm. It is that process that will 
then mark the tape as a scratch tape in the DLm.

Carl Swanson
Mobile:215.688.1459
Email: carl.swans...@verizon.net

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Michael Watkins
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 11:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

"Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume 
for open system  ?"

I am employed by the Texas CPA where such a solution was implemented. We never 
experienced any problems with contention. First, our z/OS mainframe necessarily 
had its own MTree file structure on the Data Domain, so there was no contention 
at the file level. The mainframe activity at this installation is characterized 
by a couple of bursts of activity each week while the open systems activity is 
more distributed through out the week, so the performance of the Data Domain 
has never been challenged.

NB: The DLm emulates a manual tape library. An IBM TS7000 is an automatic 
library.

NB: The TS7000 is capable of communicating directly with an IBM DS8000-class 
storage frame. The DLm is not.

Two caveats: (1) The TS7000 communicates with z/OS tape management software. 
The DLm does not. This complicates tape management. (2) If you are 
contemplating the achival of mainframe data on cloud storage using IBM's Cloud 
Tape Connector (CTC) solution, the DLm will not be able to do this. It will 
also complicate implementation of IBM's Transparent Cloud Tiering (TCT).

I don't believe you can find someone more knowledgeable about of Data 
Domain/DLm implementations than Carl Swanson.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Carl Swanson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 8:18 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

First full disclosure I work for Dell Technologies but more 
specifically in the DLm group, now with that out of the way.

Probably more than 50% of the DLm customers do share their backend 
(Data Domain) storage with the distributed world and or the IBM-I world. What 
this means is we have experiences in sizing these types of solutions. When we 
perform this sizing, we will do a study on the mainframe the distributed side 
and the IBM I if required. We then make sure that the performance 
characteristics of the back end storage array is capable of handling the peak 
workload without issue. From the DLm point of view this is the connection to 
the mainframe and we size the performance requirements based on the supplied 
RMF data .

I can provide much more detail if you like just not sure if it is 
appropriate to do so on list. Below is my non w

Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

[Carl Swanson]

First off, thank you for your kind words, really appreciate that.

One thing to note some recent announcements regarding DLm and PowerMax 
from Dell. Like IBM we now have Transparent Cloud Tiering (TCT), between the 
PowerMax and DLm. Like IBM we require our DASD and Virtual Tape product for 
this to work. One of the differences in this solution is that the connectivity 
between the PowerMax and DLm is we use FICON to move the data between the two 
systems. 

Also, for quite awhile now the DLm has had the ability to move 
(migrate)  data from its data storage to another tier of storage (Cloud). This 
feature is referred to as Long Term Retention the DLm will move the data to and 
from the storage without any need for host cycles. Generally, we see customers 
looking at this feature for data that does not have high access patterns, 
generally like archive data or data that have not been accessed for a long 
period of time. The user can create the policy (usually last time the tape was 
mounted) that best meets their needs and the DLm will move that tape once the 
policy is meet. If the tape is needed the DLm will access the new location 
directly and the data will flow back to the mainframe. We do not recommend 
using this feature for data or tapes that have a high frequency of recall.

As to the tape management functions, we are different being a MTL. What 
will take place is a step will be added to the house keeping routine that will 
pass the daily or full scratch list to the DLm. It is that process that will 
then mark the tape as a scratch tape in the DLm.

Carl Swanson
Mobile:215.688.1459
Email: carl.swans...@verizon.net

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Michael Watkins
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 11:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

"Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume 
for open system  ?"

I am employed by the Texas CPA where such a solution was implemented. We never 
experienced any problems with contention. First, our z/OS mainframe necessarily 
had its own MTree file structure on the Data Domain, so there was no contention 
at the file level. The mainframe activity at this installation is characterized 
by a couple of bursts of activity each week while the open systems activity is 
more distributed through out the week, so the performance of the Data Domain 
has never been challenged.

NB: The DLm emulates a manual tape library. An IBM TS7000 is an automatic 
library.

NB: The TS7000 is capable of communicating directly with an IBM DS8000-class 
storage frame. The DLm is not.

Two caveats: (1) The TS7000 communicates with z/OS tape management software. 
The DLm does not. This complicates tape management. (2) If you are 
contemplating the achival of mainframe data on cloud storage using IBM's Cloud 
Tape Connector (CTC) solution, the DLm will not be able to do this. It will 
also complicate implementation of IBM's Transparent Cloud Tiering (TCT).

I don't believe you can find someone more knowledgeable about of Data 
Domain/DLm implementations than Carl Swanson.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Carl Swanson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 8:18 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

First full disclosure I work for Dell Technologies but more 
specifically in the DLm group, now with that out of the way.

Probably more than 50% of the DLm customers do share their backend 
(Data Domain) storage with the distributed world and or the IBM-I world. What 
this means is we have experiences in sizing these types of solutions. When we 
perform this sizing, we will do a study on the mainframe the distributed side 
and the IBM I if required. We then make sure that the performance 
characteristics of the back end storage array is capable of handling the peak 
workload without issue. From the DLm point of view this is the connection to 
the mainframe and we size the performance requirements based on the supplied 
RMF data .

I can provide much more detail if you like just not sure if it is 
appropriate to do so on list. Below is my non work email, but most could 
probably figure out my work email.

Final answer this is a common for DLm systems and works great the key 
is proper sizing which my group handles.

Carl Swanson
Mobile:215.688.1459
Email: carl.swans...@verizon.net

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Jake Anderson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 1:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

Hello

We are analysing if EMC DLM would be a right fit to replace IBM VT

Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

My poor and limited experience with DLm was related to performance:
I started with single data stream (IEBDG job or similar).
Obviously there was a point of saturation, I mean adding next data 
stream did not increase overall throughput. Even decreased it slightly.
Of course adding any workload to a hardware box will decrease it for 
other tasks. This is another variant of "there is no free lunch" 
proverb, IMHO.
However there is simple solution for that: just take care about the 
schedule. Do not start heavy tasks concurrently.

I know, easy to say but sometimes hard to do. :-)


Last, but not least: Michael pointed important difference - I mean ATL 
and MTL definitions.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland



W dniu 04.03.2021 o 17:24, Michael Watkins pisze:

"Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume for 
open system  ?"

I am employed by the Texas CPA where such a solution was implemented. We never 
experienced any problems with contention. First, our z/OS mainframe necessarily 
had its own MTree file structure on the Data Domain, so there was no contention 
at the file level. The mainframe activity at this installation is characterized 
by a couple of bursts of activity each week while the open systems activity is 
more distributed through out the week, so the performance of the Data Domain 
has never been challenged.

NB: The DLm emulates a manual tape library. An IBM TS7000 is an automatic 
library.

NB: The TS7000 is capable of communicating directly with an IBM DS8000-class 
storage frame. The DLm is not.

Two caveats: (1) The TS7000 communicates with z/OS tape management software. 
The DLm does not. This complicates tape management. (2) If you are 
contemplating the achival of mainframe data on cloud storage using IBM's Cloud 
Tape Connector (CTC) solution, the DLm will not be able to do this. It will 
also complicate implementation of IBM's Transparent Cloud Tiering (TCT).

I don't believe you can find someone more knowledgeable about of Data 
Domain/DLm implementations than Carl Swanson.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Carl Swanson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 8:18 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

 First full disclosure I work for Dell Technologies but more 
specifically in the DLm group, now with that out of the way.

 Probably more than 50% of the DLm customers do share their backend 
(Data Domain) storage with the distributed world and or the IBM-I world. What 
this means is we have experiences in sizing these types of solutions. When we 
perform this sizing, we will do a study on the mainframe the distributed side 
and the IBM I if required. We then make sure that the performance 
characteristics of the back end storage array is capable of handling the peak 
workload without issue. From the DLm point of view this is the connection to 
the mainframe and we size the performance requirements based on the supplied 
RMF data .

 I can provide much more detail if you like just not sure if it is 
appropriate to do so on list. Below is my non work email, but most could 
probably figure out my work email.

 Final answer this is a common for DLm systems and works great the key 
is proper sizing which my group handles.

Carl Swanson
Mobile:215.688.1459
Email: carl.swans...@verizon.net

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Jake Anderson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 1:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

Hello

We are analysing if EMC DLM would be a right fit to replace IBM VTL.


I am trying to understand about backup cycles using EMC DLM when we use single 
backup solution and single virtual tape library to backup both mainframe and 
open systems.

Is there a possibility for contention ?
Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume 
for open system  ?

These performance do effect the open system as well ?

Trying to understand these from the DLM users ? Any feedback would be 
appreciated

Jake.




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

[Michael Watkins]

"Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume 
for open system  ?"

I am employed by the Texas CPA where such a solution was implemented. We never 
experienced any problems with contention. First, our z/OS mainframe necessarily 
had its own MTree file structure on the Data Domain, so there was no contention 
at the file level. The mainframe activity at this installation is characterized 
by a couple of bursts of activity each week while the open systems activity is 
more distributed through out the week, so the performance of the Data Domain 
has never been challenged.

NB: The DLm emulates a manual tape library. An IBM TS7000 is an automatic 
library.

NB: The TS7000 is capable of communicating directly with an IBM DS8000-class 
storage frame. The DLm is not.

Two caveats: (1) The TS7000 communicates with z/OS tape management software. 
The DLm does not. This complicates tape management. (2) If you are 
contemplating the achival of mainframe data on cloud storage using IBM's Cloud 
Tape Connector (CTC) solution, the DLm will not be able to do this. It will 
also complicate implementation of IBM's Transparent Cloud Tiering (TCT).

I don't believe you can find someone more knowledgeable about of Data 
Domain/DLm implementations than Carl Swanson.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Carl Swanson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 8:18 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

First full disclosure I work for Dell Technologies but more 
specifically in the DLm group, now with that out of the way.

Probably more than 50% of the DLm customers do share their backend 
(Data Domain) storage with the distributed world and or the IBM-I world. What 
this means is we have experiences in sizing these types of solutions. When we 
perform this sizing, we will do a study on the mainframe the distributed side 
and the IBM I if required. We then make sure that the performance 
characteristics of the back end storage array is capable of handling the peak 
workload without issue. From the DLm point of view this is the connection to 
the mainframe and we size the performance requirements based on the supplied 
RMF data .

I can provide much more detail if you like just not sure if it is 
appropriate to do so on list. Below is my non work email, but most could 
probably figure out my work email.

Final answer this is a common for DLm systems and works great the key 
is proper sizing which my group handles.

Carl Swanson
Mobile:215.688.1459
Email: carl.swans...@verizon.net

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Jake Anderson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 1:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

Hello

We are analysing if EMC DLM would be a right fit to replace IBM VTL.


I am trying to understand about backup cycles using EMC DLM when we use single 
backup solution and single virtual tape library to backup both mainframe and 
open systems.

Is there a possibility for contention ?
Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume 
for open system  ?

These performance do effect the open system as well ?

Trying to understand these from the DLM users ? Any feedback would be 
appreciated

Jake.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

[Carl Swanson]

First full disclosure I work for Dell Technologies but more 
specifically in the DLm group, now with that out of the way.

Probably more than 50% of the DLm customers do share their backend 
(Data Domain) storage with the distributed world and or the IBM-I world. What 
this means is we have experiences in sizing these types of solutions. When we 
perform this sizing, we will do a study on the mainframe the distributed side 
and the IBM I if required. We then make sure that the performance 
characteristics of the back end storage array is capable of handling the peak 
workload without issue. From the DLm point of view this is the connection to 
the mainframe and we size the performance requirements based on the supplied 
RMF data .

I can provide much more detail if you like just not sure if it is 
appropriate to do so on list. Below is my non work email, but most could 
probably figure out my work email.

Final answer this is a common for DLm systems and works great the key 
is proper sizing which my group handles. 

Carl Swanson
Mobile:215.688.1459
Email: carl.swans...@verizon.net

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Jake Anderson
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 1:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EMC DLM over IBM VTL

Hello

We are analysing if EMC DLM would be a right fit to replace IBM VTL.


I am trying to understand about backup cycles using EMC DLM when we use single 
backup solution and single virtual tape library to backup both mainframe and 
open systems.

Is there a possibility for contention ?
Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup volume 
for open system  ?

These performance do effect the open system as well ?

Trying to understand these from the DLM users ? Any feedback would be 
appreciated

Jake.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

EMC DLM over IBM VTL

[Jake Anderson]

Hello

We are analysing if EMC DLM would be a right fit to replace IBM VTL.


I am trying to understand about backup cycles using EMC DLM when we use
single backup solution and single virtual tape library to backup both
mainframe and open systems.

Is there a possibility for contention ?
Will there be a impact to mainframe backup when there is a high backup
volume for open system  ?

These performance do effect the open system as well ?

Trying to understand these from the DLM users ? Any feedback would be
appreciated

Jake.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Peter]

Hello

Could someone please forward me the share presentation 11020 and 14361.

Unfortunately I am not able to download this pdfs

On Thu, 24 Dec, 2020, 8:31 pm Steve Pryor,  wrote:

> In answer to your question, there are plenty of "things to be done",
> depending upon factors such as:
>
> - what tape management system do you have? Will the new technology share
> the scratch volser range or will a new one be used?
> - will the migration be performed volume-by-volume ('cloning') or
> dataset-by-dataset (copy)?
> - do applications maintain their own tape metadata repositories outside of
> the tape management system (CA-View, HSM, others)?
> - how many drives/how much time will be available for the migration as
> opposed to production work?
> - are the source/target volumes going to be SMS managed or will UNIT
> esoterics be used?
> - how many datasets and how much data needs to be migrated vs how much can
> 'naturally' expire or roll off? What's the target date?
> - who's going to perform the migration tasks? Contractors? Vendors?
> In-house staff?
>
> There are lots of issues to consider. You might want to have a look at
> some of the Share proceedings on this topic. I've done a few of these in
> the past both as general education and in conjunction with our tape
> migration software (see Share Sessions such as 11020 and 14361, among many
> others).
>
> Steve Pryor
> DTS Software, Inc.
> 1.919.833.8426 x162
> st...@dtssoftware.com
> www.dtssoftware.com
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Peter]

Thank you all.

I will do my research and get back to you if I have any questions.

On Fri, 25 Dec, 2020, 3:43 am Longnecker, Dennis, <
dennis.longnec...@courts.wa.gov> wrote:

> We did this migration not too long ago.  It was actually pretty easy once
> everything was setup and the devices were available on all LPARs.
>
> The main tool we used was FDRCOPY.  With a few simple jobs, we were able
> to use it and migrate almost 80% of the items on the TS7720 to the DLM.  It
> did the copies and recataloged everything to the new DLM "tapes".For my
> 7 years of FDRARCHIVE tapes, we used the FDRARCHIVE utilizes to copy
> everything that we needed to keep.   FDRCOPY also let us "stack" items onto
> "tapes", so a lot of the 30 years of "logs", we were able to "stack".  It
> was quite nice that it handled all the recataloging so that none of the
> using jobs needed to be modified at all.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Peter
> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2020 8:22 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration
>
>
> Hello
>
> I am interested to know about your experience on migrating TS7720 to EMC
> DLM ?
>
> Basically what are the changes to be done in zOSA Before migrating ? Any
> gotchas ?
>
> We use HSM and is there anything to be done ?
>
> Peter
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Longnecker, Dennis]

We did this migration not too long ago.  It was actually pretty easy once 
everything was setup and the devices were available on all LPARs.

The main tool we used was FDRCOPY.  With a few simple jobs, we were able to use 
it and migrate almost 80% of the items on the TS7720 to the DLM.  It did the 
copies and recataloged everything to the new DLM "tapes".For my 7 years of 
FDRARCHIVE tapes, we used the FDRARCHIVE utilizes to copy everything that we 
needed to keep.   FDRCOPY also let us "stack" items onto "tapes", so a lot of 
the 30 years of "logs", we were able to "stack".  It was quite nice that it 
handled all the recataloging so that none of the using jobs needed to be 
modified at all.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Peter
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2020 8:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration


Hello

I am interested to know about your experience on migrating TS7720 to EMC
DLM ?

Basically what are the changes to be done in zOSA Before migrating ? Any
gotchas ?

We use HSM and is there anything to be done ?

Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Roger W Suhr]

We decided not to do that and go with a TS7760  instead.  Easy peasy

Roger W. Suhr

suhr...@gmail.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Peter
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2020 11:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

Hello

I am interested to know about your experience on migrating TS7720 to EMC DLM ?

Basically what are the changes to be done in zOSA Before migrating ? Any 
gotchas ?

We use HSM and is there anything to be done ?

Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Lizette Koehler]

If you look in the IBM MAIN archives for DLM, you should find lots of 
information.

I have gone both ways IBM to EMC  and EMC to IBM

There are some changes to the way the Library is defined in ISMF>
There are some IOGEN considerations

You should find the vendor you are going to, very helpful in guiding you along 
the line.

We engaged EMC for our migration.  Other than new concepts due to the way EMC 
handles TAPE Function, it was not very bad.

We did a phased migration, which means
Our first steps were
IOGEN
Library Set up in ISMF
Updating the ACS code so certain datasets could use the DLM
Run a bunch of tests

Once we were comfortable with the DLM, we got everything else up.

But do look for DLM in IBM Main Archives.  Lots of good references in there.

Lizette




-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Peter
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2020 9:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

Hello

I am interested to know about your experience on migrating TS7720 to EMC DLM ?

Basically what are the changes to be done in zOSA Before migrating ? Any 
gotchas ?

We use HSM and is there anything to be done ?

Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

The migration was complex enough that we engaged a separate third party ISV to 
guide us through. This was going from a combination of virtual (STK) and 
physical tape 100% DLm. Allow several months.  

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Steve Pryor
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2020 8:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

*** EXTERNAL EMAIL - Use caution when opening links or attachments ***

In answer to your question, there are plenty of "things to be done", depending 
upon factors such as:

- what tape management system do you have? Will the new technology share the 
scratch volser range or will a new one be used?
- will the migration be performed volume-by-volume ('cloning') or 
dataset-by-dataset (copy)?
- do applications maintain their own tape metadata repositories outside of the 
tape management system (CA-View, HSM, others)?
- how many drives/how much time will be available for the migration as opposed 
to production work?
- are the source/target volumes going to be SMS managed or will UNIT esoterics 
be used?
- how many datasets and how much data needs to be migrated vs how much can 
'naturally' expire or roll off? What's the target date?
- who's going to perform the migration tasks? Contractors? Vendors? In-house 
staff?

There are lots of issues to consider. You might want to have a look at some of 
the Share proceedings on this topic. I've done a few of these in the past both 
as general education and in conjunction with our tape migration software (see 
Share Sessions such as 11020 and 14361, among many others).

Steve Pryor
DTS Software, Inc.
1.919.833.8426 x162
st...@dtssoftware.com
www.dtssoftware.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Steve Pryor]

In answer to your question, there are plenty of "things to be done", depending 
upon factors such as:

- what tape management system do you have? Will the new technology share the 
scratch volser range or will a new one be used?
- will the migration be performed volume-by-volume ('cloning') or 
dataset-by-dataset (copy)?
- do applications maintain their own tape metadata repositories outside of the 
tape management system (CA-View, HSM, others)?
- how many drives/how much time will be available for the migration as opposed 
to production work?
- are the source/target volumes going to be SMS managed or will UNIT esoterics 
be used? 
- how many datasets and how much data needs to be migrated vs how much can 
'naturally' expire or roll off? What's the target date?
- who's going to perform the migration tasks? Contractors? Vendors? In-house 
staff?

There are lots of issues to consider. You might want to have a look at some of 
the Share proceedings on this topic. I've done a few of these in the past both 
as general education and in conjunction with our tape migration software (see 
Share Sessions such as 11020 and 14361, among many others).

Steve Pryor
DTS Software, Inc.
1.919.833.8426 x162
st...@dtssoftware.com
www.dtssoftware.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

TS7720 to EMC DLM migration

[Peter]

Hello

I am interested to know about your experience on migrating TS7720 to EMC
DLM ?

Basically what are the changes to be done in zOSA Before migrating ? Any
gotchas ?

We use HSM and is there anything to be done ?

Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Experience on migrating TS7700 to EMC DLM

[Peter]

Hi

Is there anyone who has done the migration from IBM VTL to EMC DLM ?

Generally i would like to know how was your experience and if there are
gotchas that you can share with me.

Regards
Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Switch failure - Is there a way to set H/W failure alerts?

[RCG]

Thanks much 😊😊

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019, 1:07 AM Dana Mitchell  wrote:

> EMC DLMs support both SNMP and email alert notifications.
>
> Dana
>
> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:38:20 +0530, RCG  wrote:
>
> >Hi Experts, Can you please shed some light on setting up H/W alerts on
> >Mainframes, We had a situation where one of the two DLM switch failed 2
> >weeks ago and before we plan a change to replace that, second one failed
> as
> >well resulting in DLM outage :(
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >--
> >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Switch failure - Is there a way to set H/W failure alerts?

[Dana Mitchell]

EMC DLMs support both SNMP and email alert notifications.

Dana

On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:38:20 +0530, RCG  wrote:

>Hi Experts, Can you please shed some light on setting up H/W alerts on
>Mainframes, We had a situation where one of the two DLM switch failed 2
>weeks ago and before we plan a change to replace that, second one failed as
>well resulting in DLM outage :(
>
>Regards,
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Switch failure - Is there a way to set H/W failure alerts?

[RCG]

I'm checking on this and will share an update please

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 3:22 PM Attila Fogarasi  wrote:

> SNMP is the normal mechanism ... does EMC DLM not support that (hard to
> believe), was it misconfigured to not issue the SNMP alert, or are you not
> running software to process SNMP and process as appropriate?  This is
> pretty standard and not mainframe specific, but there are good mainframe
> based SNMP handlers such as from Broadcom (Vantage product).
>
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:08 PM RCG  wrote:
>
> > Hi Experts, Can you please shed some light on setting up H/W alerts on
> > Mainframes, We had a situation where one of the two DLM switch failed 2
> > weeks ago and before we plan a change to replace that, second one failed
> as
> > well resulting in DLM outage :(
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Switch failure - Is there a way to set H/W failure alerts?

[Attila Fogarasi]

SNMP is the normal mechanism ... does EMC DLM not support that (hard to
believe), was it misconfigured to not issue the SNMP alert, or are you not
running software to process SNMP and process as appropriate?  This is
pretty standard and not mainframe specific, but there are good mainframe
based SNMP handlers such as from Broadcom (Vantage product).

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:08 PM RCG  wrote:

> Hi Experts, Can you please shed some light on setting up H/W alerts on
> Mainframes, We had a situation where one of the two DLM switch failed 2
> weeks ago and before we plan a change to replace that, second one failed as
> well resulting in DLM outage :(
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

EMC DLM Switch failure - Is there a way to set H/W failure alerts?

[RCG]

Hi Experts, Can you please shed some light on setting up H/W alerts on
Mainframes, We had a situation where one of the two DLM switch failed 2
weeks ago and before we plan a change to replace that, second one failed as
well resulting in DLM outage :(

Regards,

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: cross posted VM and VSE - EMC DLM issue ?

[Lizette Koehler]

Did you open a case with EMC on this?  The DLM Support group is pretty good.

Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of August Carideo/RYE/US
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 1:15 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: cross posted VM and VSE - EMC DLM issue ?
> 
> I have been trying to figure out where this intervention is coming from It
> does not seem to impact the job running Any ideas ?
> Thanks,
> Augie
> 
> VM
> q 1a40
> A tape  1A40 intervention required.
> TAPE 1A40 ATTACHED TO MXVSEAUD 0A71 R/W
> Ready; T=0.01/0.01 14:46:55
> q 1940
> A tape  1940 intervention required.
> TAPE 1940 ATTACHED TO MXVSEAUD 0971 R/W
> Ready; T=0.01/0.01 14:47:14
> 
> 
> VSE
> F5 0005 *  JOB PASO01
>  F5 0005 DLM001I MOUNTED SCRTCH ON VTAPE => 0A71
> 
>  F5 0005 CADT008A MOUNT SCRATCH CINTA SYS005 DSN=TSTD01.COBRANZA OWNER=V
>  MODE=08ME JOB=ALLVSAM
>  F5 0005 CADT007I ** LABEL CINTA SYS005=A71 V00521 1 *TSTD01.COBRANZA*
> 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

cross posted VM and VSE - EMC DLM issue ?

[August Carideo/RYE/US]

I have been trying to figure out where this intervention is coming from
It does not seem to impact the job running
Any ideas ?
Thanks,
Augie

VM
q 1a40
A tape  1A40 intervention required.
TAPE 1A40 ATTACHED TO MXVSEAUD 0A71 R/W
Ready; T=0.01/0.01 14:46:55
q 1940
A tape  1940 intervention required.
TAPE 1940 ATTACHED TO MXVSEAUD 0971 R/W
Ready; T=0.01/0.01 14:47:14


VSE
F5 0005 *  JOB PASO01
 F5 0005 DLM001I MOUNTED SCRTCH ON VTAPE => 0A71

 F5 0005 CADT008A MOUNT SCRATCH CINTA SYS005 DSN=TSTD01.COBRANZA OWNER=V
 MODE=08ME JOB=ALLVSAM
 F5 0005 CADT007I ** LABEL CINTA SYS005=A71 V00521 1 *TSTD01.COBRANZA*

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[Tom Brennan]

Thanks Vince.

Speaking of reel tapes, I was at a datacenter earlier this year and saw 
a large room for tape processing.  When I walked in it was like walking 
back to the 1990's.  There was a human operator 24x7 watching multiple 
3270 consoles for manual tape mounts on various devices including 3480 
and 3490 boxes.  But there were no round tapes - the operator said they 
had gotten rid of the last one - only 5 years ago!


Vince Getgood wrote:

Lizette is correct -

The DLm is essentially just a device that represents tape drives to the 
mainframe.  It needs backend storage, such as a DataDomain or Vmax to actually 
store the tape data.

When a tape is requested, the mainframe asks the DLm, which "passes through" the request to the backend storage, which then opens a Unix file (in a proprietary data format). 

It's possible to attach a "real" (or possibly even "REEL") tape drive to the DLm / backend storage, and copy data off. 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[Vince Getgood]

Lizette is correct -

The DLm is essentially just a device that represents tape drives to the 
mainframe.  It needs backend storage, such as a DataDomain or Vmax to actually 
store the tape data.

When a tape is requested, the mainframe asks the DLm, which "passes through" 
the request to the backend storage, which then opens a Unix file (in a 
proprietary data format). 

It's possible to attach a "real" (or possibly even "REEL") tape drive to the 
DLm / backend storage, and copy data off.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLm to the Cloud

[Edward Gould]

> On Jul 21, 2017, at 9:32 AM, Lizette Koehler  wrote:
> 
> http://www.storagereview.com/dell_emc_announce_dlm_45_to_eliminate_physical_tape
> 
> 
> Today at SHARE 2017, Dell EMC announced the latest version of its Disk Library
> for mainframe (DLm) virtual tape, version 4.5. The latest version of Dell 
> EMC’s
> cloud-based virtual tape is aiming to replace physical tape as the go to
> long-term retention strategy. Dell EMC states that DLm 4.5 can make the
> mainframe data center more efficient by moving mainframe virtual tape data to
> the cloud.
> 
> 
> I am not sure how big the "cloud" would have to be for some shops.
> 
———SNIP———
Watch out for the thunderstorms and the lightning that usually occurs.

Ed
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[Tom Brennan]

Thanks Jerry, that helps.

Jerry Whitteridge wrote:

Tom - Think of the DLM as the head of string Tape controller (from the old 
days) that provides the UCB's. Then there is some form of Storage attached 
(think the physical tape that got mounted)  - in our case this is a DD4500 as 
an example. EMC allows only certain Storage to attach to the DLM.

Jerry Whitteridge
Manager Mainframe Systems & Storage
Albertsons - Safeway Inc.
623 869 5523
Corporate Tieline - 85523

If you feel in control
you just aren't going fast enough.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Lizette Koehler
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 4:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: Backing up EMC DLM

Tom

I may be wrong, but the DLm is more like a database for the tapes.  There is no 
storage on it.  The needs to be another piece of equipment to provide the 
storage for the actual tape usage.

I think you are asking can you use a storage device other than EMC equipment to 
hold the actual tape data.

Is that correct?

If so, I have not seen any documentation that would indicate anything other 
than EMC equipment can be used for the DLm for their actual tape data.

This link does not show anything other than EMC equipment. Currently, VMAX, 
VNX, DD are the only devices I have seen that works with the DLm.

https://www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/data-sheet/h4207-disk-library-mainframe-
ds.pdf


So, you are probably trying to see if anyone used something other than EMC 
equipment with the DLm and was successful.



Lizette




-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Tom Brennan
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Backing up EMC DLM

Is anyone using a Quantum (quantum.com) device to back up data from an
EMC DLM? (Disk Library for Mainframe - looks like tape to the
mainframe)




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

 Warning: All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate 
e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the 
recipient. This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended only 
for the use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not 
the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this message 
in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, 
please notify the sender immediately.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[Jerry Whitteridge]

Tom - Think of the DLM as the head of string Tape controller (from the old 
days) that provides the UCB's. Then there is some form of Storage attached 
(think the physical tape that got mounted)  - in our case this is a DD4500 as 
an example. EMC allows only certain Storage to attach to the DLM.

Jerry Whitteridge
Manager Mainframe Systems & Storage
Albertsons - Safeway Inc.
623 869 5523
Corporate Tieline - 85523

If you feel in control
you just aren't going fast enough.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Lizette Koehler
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 4:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: Backing up EMC DLM

Tom

I may be wrong, but the DLm is more like a database for the tapes.  There is no 
storage on it.  The needs to be another piece of equipment to provide the 
storage for the actual tape usage.

I think you are asking can you use a storage device other than EMC equipment to 
hold the actual tape data.

Is that correct?

If so, I have not seen any documentation that would indicate anything other 
than EMC equipment can be used for the DLm for their actual tape data.

This link does not show anything other than EMC equipment. Currently, VMAX, 
VNX, DD are the only devices I have seen that works with the DLm.

https://www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/data-sheet/h4207-disk-library-mainframe-
ds.pdf


So, you are probably trying to see if anyone used something other than EMC 
equipment with the DLm and was successful.



Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Tom Brennan
> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:27 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Backing up EMC DLM
>
> Is anyone using a Quantum (quantum.com) device to back up data from an
> EMC DLM? (Disk Library for Mainframe - looks like tape to the
> mainframe)
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

 Warning: All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate 
e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the 
recipient. This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended only 
for the use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not 
the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this message 
in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, 
please notify the sender immediately.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: RES: EMC DLm to the Cloud

[Carmen Vitullo]

In my limited experience with DD (Data Domain) and DLM (emulated virtual tape) 
the issues we had was time to replicate and since we wanted the less-expensive 
solution we shared our DD with the distributed systems. 
We replicated to a local DR site, over black fiber and to a DR site almost 800 
miles away, many issue getting the bandwidth even after the initial replication 
was complete, I forget how much data we were replicating but it was not the 
entire 8870 we had. 
at DR we had support issues because at the time there was one person, maybe 2 
in the US that knew anything about DD and DLM configuration, we were left at DR 
with no support till the last minute, there were some replication issue that 
should not have been replicated, also fighting for I/O with the distributed 
folks, they had to shut down most of their TSM servers to allow us to get any 
I/O thru put. 
most if the issue I think were related to trying to get a good solution for the 
cheapest price. 
I would hope EMC has more support folks for this solution on the mainframe. 


my 2 cents 


Carmen 


- Original Message -

From: "Carlos Bodra - Pessoal"  
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 11:37:09 AM 
Subject: RES: EMC DLm to the Cloud 

I did some tests with another Vendor similar to DellEMC solution moving data 
from virtual tape to cloud and results was not good. A bigger bigger reclaim 
time to get dataset available to mainframe, and very expensive. 
I need to store about 240TB in cloud and cost quiet project. We buy more 
midrange storage and save a lot of money and get a much more fast reclaim time 
to get dataset available to restore. 

Carlos Bodra 
IBM System Certified System z 
São Paulo - Brazil 

-Mensagem original- 
De: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] Em nome de 
R.S. 
Enviada em: sexta-feira, 21 de julho de 2017 11:52 
Para: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Assunto: Re: EMC DLm to the Cloud 

W dniu 2017-07-21 o 16:32, Lizette Koehler pisze: 
> http://www.storagereview.com/dell_emc_announce_dlm_45_to_eliminate_phy 
> sical_tape 
> 
> 
> Today at SHARE 2017, Dell EMC announced the latest version of its Disk 
> Library for mainframe (DLm) virtual tape, version 4.5. The latest 
> version of Dell EMC's cloud-based virtual tape is aiming to replace 
> physical tape as the go to long-term retention strategy. Dell EMC 
> states that DLm 4.5 can make the mainframe data center more efficient 
> by moving mainframe virtual tape data to the cloud. 
> 
> 
> I am not sure how big the "cloud" would have to be for some shops. 

That's simple: a company sells no tapes. Only disk systems. 
What can they claim? 

BTW: real tapes, on foreground or just background of some VTS are really give 
way to disks. 
>From the other hand, spinning disks give way to SSDs. 
SSDs disks (more exactly: SSD with disk interface) give way to flash systems... 


-- 
Radoslaw Skorupka 
Lodz, Poland 




== 


-- 
Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie 
jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być 
karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie 
zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość 
włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku. 

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive. 

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.plsąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII 
Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców 
KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał 
zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych. 


-- 
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive acces

RES: EMC DLm to the Cloud

[Carlos Bodra - Pessoal]

I did some tests with another Vendor similar to DellEMC solution moving data 
from virtual tape to cloud and results was not good. A bigger bigger reclaim 
time to get dataset available to mainframe, and very expensive.
I need to store about 240TB in cloud and cost quiet project. We buy more 
midrange storage and save a lot of money and get a much more fast reclaim time 
to get dataset available to restore.

Carlos Bodra
IBM System Certified System z
São Paulo - Brazil

-Mensagem original-
De: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] Em nome de 
R.S.
Enviada em: sexta-feira, 21 de julho de 2017 11:52
Para: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Assunto: Re: EMC DLm to the Cloud

W dniu 2017-07-21 o 16:32, Lizette Koehler pisze:
> http://www.storagereview.com/dell_emc_announce_dlm_45_to_eliminate_phy
> sical_tape
>
>
> Today at SHARE 2017, Dell EMC announced the latest version of its Disk 
> Library for mainframe (DLm) virtual tape, version 4.5. The latest 
> version of Dell EMC's cloud-based virtual tape is aiming to replace 
> physical tape as the go to long-term retention strategy. Dell EMC 
> states that DLm 4.5 can make the mainframe data center more efficient 
> by moving mainframe virtual tape data to the cloud.
>
>
> I am not sure how big the "cloud" would have to be for some shops.

That's simple: a company sells no tapes. Only disk systems.
What can they claim?

BTW: real tapes, on foreground or just background of some VTS are really give 
way to disks.
 From the other hand, spinning disks give way to SSDs.
SSDs disks (more exactly: SSD with disk interface) give way to flash systems...


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland




==


--
 Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie 
jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być 
karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie 
zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość 
włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

 This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive.

 mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.plsąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII 
Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców 
KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał 
zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[Tom Brennan]

I'm new to this so I can't answer your question yet, but thanks for 
responding and for the web reference.  And by coincidence I also see 
your DLM post about cloud too!


Lizette Koehler wrote:

Tom

I may be wrong, but the DLm is more like a database for the tapes.  There is no
storage on it.  The needs to be another piece of equipment to provide the
storage for the actual tape usage.

I think you are asking can you use a storage device other than EMC equipment to
hold the actual tape data.

Is that correct?

If so, I have not seen any documentation that would indicate anything other than
EMC equipment can be used for the DLm for their actual tape data.

This link does not show anything other than EMC equipment. Currently, VMAX, VNX,
DD are the only devices I have seen that works with the DLm.

https://www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/data-sheet/h4207-disk-library-mainframe-
ds.pdf


So, you are probably trying to see if anyone used something other than EMC
equipment with the DLm and was successful.



Lizette




-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Tom Brennan
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Backing up EMC DLM

Is anyone using a Quantum (quantum.com) device to back up data from an EMC
DLM? (Disk Library for Mainframe - looks like tape to the mainframe)




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[Tom Brennan]

Thanks Radoslaw, I appreciate it.

R.S. wrote:

W dniu 2017-07-21 o 04:27, Tom Brennan pisze:

Is anyone using a Quantum (quantum.com) device to back up data from an 
EMC DLM? (Disk Library for Mainframe - looks like tape to the mainframe)




AFAIK it is not possible since EMC limited DLM to connect only to EMC 
storage.
Before that DLM was named BusTech and could use various disk & tape 
vendors.




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLm to the Cloud

[R.S.]

W dniu 2017-07-21 o 16:32, Lizette Koehler pisze:

http://www.storagereview.com/dell_emc_announce_dlm_45_to_eliminate_physical_tape


Today at SHARE 2017, Dell EMC announced the latest version of its Disk Library
for mainframe (DLm) virtual tape, version 4.5. The latest version of Dell EMC's
cloud-based virtual tape is aiming to replace physical tape as the go to
long-term retention strategy. Dell EMC states that DLm 4.5 can make the
mainframe data center more efficient by moving mainframe virtual tape data to
the cloud.


I am not sure how big the "cloud" would have to be for some shops.


That's simple: a company sells no tapes. Only disk systems.
What can they claim?

BTW: real tapes, on foreground or just background of some VTS are really 
give way to disks.

From the other hand, spinning disks give way to SSDs.
SSDs disks (more exactly: SSD with disk interface) give way to flash 
systems...



--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland




==


   --
Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie 
jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być 
karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie 
zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość 
włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive.

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.plsąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII 
Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców 
KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał 
zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych.
   


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLm to the Cloud

[Carmen Vitullo]

It would have to be a big improvement over the last iteration. we had many 
issues with a DR DD and DLM from Arkansas to Boulder. 


- Original Message -

From: "Lizette Koehler"  
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 9:32:28 AM 
Subject: EMC DLm to the Cloud 

http://www.storagereview.com/dell_emc_announce_dlm_45_to_eliminate_physical_tape
 


Today at SHARE 2017, Dell EMC announced the latest version of its Disk Library 
for mainframe (DLm) virtual tape, version 4.5. The latest version of Dell EMC’s 
cloud-based virtual tape is aiming to replace physical tape as the go to 
long-term retention strategy. Dell EMC states that DLm 4.5 can make the 
mainframe data center more efficient by moving mainframe virtual tape data to 
the cloud. 


I am not sure how big the "cloud" would have to be for some shops. 


Lizette Koehler 
statistics: A precise and logical method for stating a half-truth inaccurately 

-- 
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, 
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

EMC DLm to the Cloud

[Lizette Koehler]

http://www.storagereview.com/dell_emc_announce_dlm_45_to_eliminate_physical_tape


Today at SHARE 2017, Dell EMC announced the latest version of its Disk Library
for mainframe (DLm) virtual tape, version 4.5. The latest version of Dell EMC’s
cloud-based virtual tape is aiming to replace physical tape as the go to
long-term retention strategy. Dell EMC states that DLm 4.5 can make the
mainframe data center more efficient by moving mainframe virtual tape data to
the cloud.


I am not sure how big the "cloud" would have to be for some shops.


Lizette Koehler
statistics: A precise and logical method for stating a half-truth inaccurately

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[Lizette Koehler]

Tom

I may be wrong, but the DLm is more like a database for the tapes.  There is no
storage on it.  The needs to be another piece of equipment to provide the
storage for the actual tape usage.

I think you are asking can you use a storage device other than EMC equipment to
hold the actual tape data.

Is that correct?

If so, I have not seen any documentation that would indicate anything other than
EMC equipment can be used for the DLm for their actual tape data.

This link does not show anything other than EMC equipment. Currently, VMAX, VNX,
DD are the only devices I have seen that works with the DLm.

https://www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/data-sheet/h4207-disk-library-mainframe-
ds.pdf


So, you are probably trying to see if anyone used something other than EMC
equipment with the DLm and was successful.



Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Tom Brennan
> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:27 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Backing up EMC DLM
> 
> Is anyone using a Quantum (quantum.com) device to back up data from an EMC
> DLM? (Disk Library for Mainframe - looks like tape to the mainframe)
> 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Backing up EMC DLM

[R.S.]

W dniu 2017-07-21 o 04:27, Tom Brennan pisze:
Is anyone using a Quantum (quantum.com) device to back up data from an 
EMC DLM? (Disk Library for Mainframe - looks like tape to the mainframe)



AFAIK it is not possible since EMC limited DLM to connect only to EMC 
storage.
Before that DLM was named BusTech and could use various disk & tape 
vendors.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland




==


   --
Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie 
jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być 
karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie 
zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość 
włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive.

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.plsąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII 
Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców 
KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał 
zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych.
   


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Backing up EMC DLM

[Tom Brennan]

Is anyone using a Quantum (quantum.com) device to back up data from an 
EMC DLM? (Disk Library for Mainframe - looks like tape to the mainframe)


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR

[Mike Schwab]

1) HCD / I/O definition in MVS.

3) Set range for volumes in the Virtual tape pool.  Other volumes
would be manual mounts.

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Lizette Koehler
 wrote:
> So, I may not be very clear on this question.
>
> Fred is in the Sandbox and there are 3 plexes in that environment.  
> Dev/Sandbox, and DR.
>
> DR is only active when we test.
>
> Dev and Sandbox share Fred.  So the definitions are the same.
>
> Production has Bob and Bob is being replicated to FRED.
>
> So the areas that I see need to be actioned are
> 1) HCD
> 2) SMS Config for Tape library
> 3) SMS Acs constructs for tape library.
>
> I am thinking that even if I add the FRED Library to Production, I still need 
> the ACS routines to use the correct names when there are in DR in the Sandbox 
> CEC.  This would be due to the use of specific names rather than generic 
> names that could be anywhere.
>
>
> Lizette
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
>> Behalf Of Lizette Koehler
>> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 7:24 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR
>>
>> I apologize for the poorly worded (if they are) questions.  We have only used
>> physical tape until recently which meant mailing to DR site and accessing as
>> foreign tape.  And this is our first DR with Virtual tape.
>>
>> So, in sandbox FRED is defined with LIBID 01.In Production Bob is
>> defined with LIBID 02
>>
>> Our HCD gen has either LIB ID 01 or LIB ID 02
>>
>> So - and this is because I do not do HCD Gens - Do I need to get LIB ID 01
>> added in the Production HCD Gen so I can define Fred in Production?  Then to
>> use BOB in production DR systems?
>>
>> Do I need to update my ACS functions or Library Definitions? The replicated
>> production tape data is only used in the DR LPARs that reside on my sandbox
>> CEC.
>>
>> And how do I prevent someone from accidently trying to bring online the FRED
>> Library which would not physically exist.
>>
>> What are the pros and cons of setting up the HCD to use the exact same setup
>> (different UCBs probably) for Bob and Fred?
>>
>> To help with config understanding:
>>
>> Bob and Fred are two unique DLm/DD appliances that replicate all tape data to
>> each other.  Fred is active in the Sandbox side of my CEC where my DR LPARs
>> reside.  Bob is active in our Production CEC.
>>
>> I need to access BOB data in our DR Lpars that are on our Sandbox CEC.  
>> Fred's
>> uses LIB ID 01 and Bob uses Lib ID 02.  Would it be beneficial (and can I do
>> this) to change both Bob and Fred to the same name (say Suzy) and use the 
>> same
>> LIB ID number to make this easier?  The Prod and Sandbox CECs are several
>> miles apart.  They would not have physical access to the DLm/DD appliances 
>> and
>> would not have fiber to access them.
>>
>> Lizette
>>
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
>> > On Behalf Of Brian Fraser
>> > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 6:19 AM
>> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> > Subject: Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR
>> >
>> > I'm not using DLM, but I'd think the setup would probably be the same
>> > as with Ts7700.
>> >
>> > I have both PROD and DR libraries defined in the Storage Group.
>> >
>> > When running in PROD, the PROD library is selected ( as its the only
>> > one with physical Ficon connection) then if we run in DR,  then the DR
>> > library is selected.
>> >
>> > On 12 Nov 2016 8:18 a.m., "Lizette Koehler"  
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I am trying to establish the DLm/DD that is currently running in our
>> > > Sandbox in our DR Plex in the same CEC.
>> > >
>> > > The Data is replicated from our production environment.  This uses a
>> > > different DLm/DD setup which has a unique name, call it BOB, in
>> production.
>> > >
>> > > In our Sandbox the DLm/DD is called Fred.
>> > >
>> > > So when we replicate our DASD and TAPE the BOB name is in the SMS
>> > > configuration.  But BOB does not exist in our CEC in the Sandbox
>> > > where our DR system can be brought up.
>> > >
>> > > What is the easiest way to get BOB available in DR and allow us

Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR

[Lizette Koehler]

So, I may not be very clear on this question.

Fred is in the Sandbox and there are 3 plexes in that environment.  
Dev/Sandbox, and DR.

DR is only active when we test.

Dev and Sandbox share Fred.  So the definitions are the same.

Production has Bob and Bob is being replicated to FRED.

So the areas that I see need to be actioned are
1) HCD
2) SMS Config for Tape library
3) SMS Acs constructs for tape library.

I am thinking that even if I add the FRED Library to Production, I still need 
the ACS routines to use the correct names when there are in DR in the Sandbox 
CEC.  This would be due to the use of specific names rather than generic names 
that could be anywhere.


Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Lizette Koehler
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 7:24 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR
> 
> I apologize for the poorly worded (if they are) questions.  We have only used
> physical tape until recently which meant mailing to DR site and accessing as
> foreign tape.  And this is our first DR with Virtual tape.
> 
> So, in sandbox FRED is defined with LIBID 01.In Production Bob is
> defined with LIBID 02
> 
> Our HCD gen has either LIB ID 01 or LIB ID 02
> 
> So - and this is because I do not do HCD Gens - Do I need to get LIB ID 01
> added in the Production HCD Gen so I can define Fred in Production?  Then to
> use BOB in production DR systems?
> 
> Do I need to update my ACS functions or Library Definitions? The replicated
> production tape data is only used in the DR LPARs that reside on my sandbox
> CEC.
> 
> And how do I prevent someone from accidently trying to bring online the FRED
> Library which would not physically exist.
> 
> What are the pros and cons of setting up the HCD to use the exact same setup
> (different UCBs probably) for Bob and Fred?
> 
> To help with config understanding:
> 
> Bob and Fred are two unique DLm/DD appliances that replicate all tape data to
> each other.  Fred is active in the Sandbox side of my CEC where my DR LPARs
> reside.  Bob is active in our Production CEC.
> 
> I need to access BOB data in our DR Lpars that are on our Sandbox CEC.  Fred's
> uses LIB ID 01 and Bob uses Lib ID 02.  Would it be beneficial (and can I do
> this) to change both Bob and Fred to the same name (say Suzy) and use the same
> LIB ID number to make this easier?  The Prod and Sandbox CECs are several
> miles apart.  They would not have physical access to the DLm/DD appliances and
> would not have fiber to access them.
> 
> Lizette
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> > On Behalf Of Brian Fraser
> > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 6:19 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR
> >
> > I'm not using DLM, but I'd think the setup would probably be the same
> > as with Ts7700.
> >
> > I have both PROD and DR libraries defined in the Storage Group.
> >
> > When running in PROD, the PROD library is selected ( as its the only
> > one with physical Ficon connection) then if we run in DR,  then the DR
> > library is selected.
> >
> > On 12 Nov 2016 8:18 a.m., "Lizette Koehler"  wrote:
> >
> > > I am trying to establish the DLm/DD that is currently running in our
> > > Sandbox in our DR Plex in the same CEC.
> > >
> > > The Data is replicated from our production environment.  This uses a
> > > different DLm/DD setup which has a unique name, call it BOB, in
> production.
> > >
> > > In our Sandbox the DLm/DD is called Fred.
> > >
> > > So when we replicate our DASD and TAPE the BOB name is in the SMS
> > > configuration.  But BOB does not exist in our CEC in the Sandbox
> > > where our DR system can be brought up.
> > >
> > > What is the easiest way to get BOB available in DR and allow us to
> > > use the replicated tapes in DR.
> > >
> > >
> > > From what I can see the SMS information all has BOB in it.  ISMF
> > > Option 10 shows BOB.  The ACS Codes for DR have BOB.  But the only
> > > DLm/DD I have available is FRED.
> > >
> > > Can I code FRED in the Production environment even though it will
> > > never be used and adjust my ACS routines as needed?
> > > Is there a way to make BOB available in DR?  Or do I need to Use
> > > FRED and adjust the DR SMS environment to use FRED for my DR
> > > production
> > environment?
> > >
> > > My guess is I have to manually update my DR Production to use FRED.
> > > But that is a guess..
> > >
> > > Any thoughts or guidance will be appreciated.
> > >
> > >
> > > Lizette

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR

[Lizette Koehler]

I apologize for the poorly worded (if they are) questions.  We have only used 
physical tape until recently which meant mailing to DR site and accessing as 
foreign tape.  And this is our first DR with Virtual tape.

So, in sandbox FRED is defined with LIBID 01.In Production Bob is 
defined with LIBID 02

Our HCD gen has either LIB ID 01 or LIB ID 02

So - and this is because I do not do HCD Gens - Do I need to get LIB ID 01 
added in the Production HCD Gen so I can define Fred in Production?  Then to 
use BOB in production DR systems?  

Do I need to update my ACS functions or Library Definitions? The replicated 
production tape data is only used in the DR LPARs that reside on my sandbox 
CEC.  

And how do I prevent someone from accidently trying to bring online the FRED 
Library which would not physically exist.  

What are the pros and cons of setting up the HCD to use the exact same setup 
(different UCBs probably) for Bob and Fred?

To help with config understanding: 

Bob and Fred are two unique DLm/DD appliances that replicate all tape data to 
each other.  Fred is active in the Sandbox side of my CEC where my DR LPARs 
reside.  Bob is active in our Production CEC.

I need to access BOB data in our DR Lpars that are on our Sandbox CEC.  Fred's 
uses LIB ID 01 and Bob uses Lib ID 02.  Would it be beneficial (and can I do 
this) to change both Bob and Fred to the same name (say Suzy) and use the same 
LIB ID number to make this easier?  The Prod and Sandbox CECs are several miles 
apart.  They would not have physical access to the DLm/DD appliances and would 
not have fiber to access them.

Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Brian Fraser
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 6:19 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR
> 
> I'm not using DLM, but I'd think the setup would probably be the same as with
> Ts7700.
> 
> I have both PROD and DR libraries defined in the Storage Group.
> 
> When running in PROD, the PROD library is selected ( as its the only one with
> physical Ficon connection) then if we run in DR,  then the DR library is
> selected.
> 
> On 12 Nov 2016 8:18 a.m., "Lizette Koehler"  wrote:
> 
> > I am trying to establish the DLm/DD that is currently running in our
> > Sandbox in our DR Plex in the same CEC.
> >
> > The Data is replicated from our production environment.  This uses a
> > different DLm/DD setup which has a unique name, call it BOB, in production.
> >
> > In our Sandbox the DLm/DD is called Fred.
> >
> > So when we replicate our DASD and TAPE the BOB name is in the SMS
> > configuration.  But BOB does not exist in our CEC in the Sandbox where
> > our DR system can be brought up.
> >
> > What is the easiest way to get BOB available in DR and allow us to use
> > the replicated tapes in DR.
> >
> >
> > From what I can see the SMS information all has BOB in it.  ISMF
> > Option 10 shows BOB.  The ACS Codes for DR have BOB.  But the only
> > DLm/DD I have available is FRED.
> >
> > Can I code FRED in the Production environment even though it will
> > never be used and adjust my ACS routines as needed?
> > Is there a way to make BOB available in DR?  Or do I need to Use FRED
> > and adjust the DR SMS environment to use FRED for my DR production
> environment?
> >
> > My guess is I have to manually update my DR Production to use FRED.
> > But that is a guess..
> >
> > Any thoughts or guidance will be appreciated.
> >
> >
> > Lizette

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR

[Brian Fraser]

I'm not using DLM, but I'd think the setup would probably be the same as
with Ts7700.

I have both PROD and DR libraries defined in the Storage Group.

When running in PROD, the PROD library is selected ( as its the only one
with physical Ficon connection) then if we run in DR,  then the DR library
is selected.

On 12 Nov 2016 8:18 a.m., "Lizette Koehler"  wrote:

> I am trying to establish the DLm/DD that is currently running in our
> Sandbox in our DR Plex in the same CEC.
>
> The Data is replicated from our production environment.  This uses a
> different DLm/DD setup which has a unique name, call it BOB, in production.
>
> In our Sandbox the DLm/DD is called Fred.
>
> So when we replicate our DASD and TAPE the BOB name is in the SMS
> configuration.  But BOB does not exist in our CEC in the Sandbox where our
> DR system can be brought up.
>
> What is the easiest way to get BOB available in DR and allow us to use the
> replicated tapes in DR.
>
>
> From what I can see the SMS information all has BOB in it.  ISMF Option 10
> shows BOB.  The ACS Codes for DR have BOB.  But the only DLm/DD I have
> available is FRED.
>
> Can I code FRED in the Production environment even though it will never be
> used and adjust my ACS routines as needed?
> Is there a way to make BOB available in DR?  Or do I need to Use FRED and
> adjust the DR SMS environment to use FRED for my DR production environment?
>
> My guess is I have to manually update my DR Production to use FRED.  But
> that is a grues..
>
> Any thoughts or guidance will be appreciated.
>
>
> Lizette
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Setting up existing EMC DLM/DD in DR

[Lizette Koehler]

I am trying to establish the DLm/DD that is currently running in our Sandbox in 
our DR Plex in the same CEC.

The Data is replicated from our production environment.  This uses a different 
DLm/DD setup which has a unique name, call it BOB, in production.

In our Sandbox the DLm/DD is called Fred.

So when we replicate our DASD and TAPE the BOB name is in the SMS 
configuration.  But BOB does not exist in our CEC in the Sandbox where our DR 
system can be brought up. 

What is the easiest way to get BOB available in DR and allow us to use the 
replicated tapes in DR.


From what I can see the SMS information all has BOB in it.  ISMF Option 10 
shows BOB.  The ACS Codes for DR have BOB.  But the only DLm/DD I have 
available is FRED.

Can I code FRED in the Production environment even though it will never be used 
and adjust my ACS routines as needed?
Is there a way to make BOB available in DR?  Or do I need to Use FRED and 
adjust the DR SMS environment to use FRED for my DR production environment?

My guess is I have to manually update my DR Production to use FRED.  But that 
is a grues..

Any thoughts or guidance will be appreciated.


Lizette

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM

[Carl Swanson]

Melissa,

Can you contact me off list and I will get the proper resources
working with you to sort this out. I have some ideas but with the limited
information available I do not want to guess. As you may have guessed I am
with EMC and part of the Mainframe team specifically the DLm team. We will
be glad to get to the bottom of this for you. 

My EMC contact email address is carl.swan...@emc.com 

Thanks and looking forward to working with you,


Carl Swanson
Mobile:215.688.1459
Email: carl.swans...@verizon.net

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Melissa Perry
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 4:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EMC DLM

We have an EMC DLM in production replicating to one for DR.  We are unable
to get buy getting the following message when attempting to restore from the
DR box

DLm455E: Error locking volume 300119 (/tapelib/DISK0/300119): Read-only file

system

I genned a different set of tape drives to use on the current production box
to test DR.   We were just expecting to be able to restore from DR box as we
can in production.  Obviously we made a bad assumption or missed something.

I understand that the DR side is read only.  All I am trying to do is
restore a PDS from a 'tape' on the DR side.  Any help would be greatly
appreciated.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM

[Lizette Koehler]

I am going to say this - and I am not happy.

Contact EMC through their SR process.  They are very adept as helping with 
these types of issues.

We have had several Tapes being locked and they were able to Dial in and 
correct the issue.  They also can provide guidance on how to do what you want.

We have a similar configuration, but I have not tested the DR tapes yet.  

Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Melissa Perry
> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 1:20 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: EMC DLM
> 
> We have an EMC DLM in production replicating to one for DR.  We are unable
> to get buy getting the following message when attempting to restore from
> the DR box
> 
> DLm455E: Error locking volume 300119 (/tapelib/DISK0/300119): Read-only
> file
> system
> 
> I genned a different set of tape drives to use on the current production box
> to test DR.   We were just expecting to be able to restore from DR box as we
> can in production.  Obviously we made a bad assumption or missed
> something.
> 
> I understand that the DR side is read only.  All I am trying to do is restore 
> a
> PDS from a 'tape' on the DR side.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM

[Clifford McNeill]

I know very little about EMC DLM but I do know it uses a lock directory that 
you need read/write access to.  The lock directory is specified on the Storage 
tab of the administrator's web interface.
Cliff McNeill

> 
> We have an EMC DLM in production replicating to one for DR.  We are unable to 
> get buy getting the following message when attempting to restore from the DR 
> box
> 
> DLm455E: Error locking volume 300119 (/tapelib/DISK0/300119): Read-only file  
>   
> system
> 

  
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

EMC DLM

[Melissa Perry]

We have an EMC DLM in production replicating to one for DR.  We are unable to 
get buy getting the following message when attempting to restore from the DR box

DLm455E: Error locking volume 300119 (/tapelib/DISK0/300119): Read-only file
system

I genned a different set of tape drives to use on the current production box to 
test DR.   We were just expecting to be able to restore from DR box as we can 
in production.  Obviously we made a bad assumption or missed something.

I understand that the DR side is read only.  All I am trying to do is restore a 
PDS from a 'tape' on the DR side.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Thanks for the help with EMC DLm Setup

[Lizette Koehler]

I wanted to thank everyone who helped me with setting up my EMC DLm/DD Tape
Appliances.  Especially Mark Zelden and Ramachandran (aka RAM).

 

It has been a bit of a struggle with learning LINUX and open system jargon
to get them attached and working with the mainframe.

 

But we have been successful.

 

So thanks.

 

Lizette

 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Setting up an EMC DLm in ISMF Options

[Lizette Koehler]

I am hoping someone can just give a couple of examples that will help me
determine if I have done this correctly.

 

We are z/OS V1.12 and going to an EMC DLm device for virtual tape.

 

I have not setup tape hardware inside ISMF before, and the manuals do not
have enough pictures for me to see what it should look like.

 

If someone who has setup a DLm in their SMS environment, I just need a quick
cheat sheet to ensure the Dataclas, StorageGroup and Tape library is
correctly configured.

 

There are lots of options in these panels and I have not found documentation
that says - it must be setup this way as an MTL to work.

 

I would prefer to do this offlist.  So just email me and I can provide the
screen prints of my questions.

 

 

Thanks for any assistance.

 

Lizette

 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Data Domain and z/OS

[Mark Zelden]

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 12:53:56 -0500, Mike Schwab  wrote:

>See below.
>
>On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Lizette Koehler
> wrote:
>> We are beginning to investigate the possibility of having a DLm and Data
>> Domain tapeless solution in our shop.  We are just looking
>>
>> If anyone in a medium to large shop is using this, and you would like to
>> share your observations with me, that would be great.  We have about 1PB of
>> tape storage (mostly HSM ML2 data) between my two data centers.
>We have 4.7T for 10,000 volumes * 50 volumes ranges. 235TB total, 61%
>active volumes.  Make sure you activate TTL (time to live) scratch
>tape management (when it reclaims scratch volumes as free space).
>
>> And I would
>> like that data to be replicated to both devices.  I will also have long tern
>> retention needs for some  of my data.  I need to have my primary tape data
>> in the secondary data center for DR.  It would be nice to have my critical
>> development data sent to the primary site just in-case the DR site is the
>> one that is down.  Mostly my Source Management files.
>>
>We duplicate all VTapes from a DLm 960 to DLm 4080s.  I don't think we
>have dedup installed.
>>
>> EMC is suggestion an DLm8000 family and Data Domain for dedup of the data
>> for the mainframe.
>>
>> Some questions I might be interested in
>>
>> How is the performance when the data has to be rehydrated?
>>
>> Is there any significant impact on distances between DD + DLm for DR usage?
>> What size transmission pipe will make it happy?  Our Primary and secondary
>> sites are about 800 miles apart.
>>
>Our sites are about 200 miles apart.  Our fiber falls behind during
>our evening batch backup window, but catches back up by 7am.  It is
>Async, so it is not waiting for responses.  We are upgrading the
>fiber, last link won't be in for another 18 months.
>
>>

One of my clients uses DLm960.  2 of them in primary and at DR site,
each with about 550TB (1100TB per site) with 4 VTEs (virtual tape engines,
which are blades that contain the virtual tape drives), doing full replication 
of all 
virtual tape.  That includes test data because going back years ago
there was just too many instances of missing tapes at DR and standards
not always being followed.  Prior to DLm, Oracle/STK VSM was used and
we recovered 100% of the tape at DR, so we just followed the same 
philosophy.   80/20 rule anyway... maybe more like 90/10.  IOW, only
10% is probably test data anyway so better safe than sorry.  My 
client doesn't have data domain.  IIRC there was analysis done prior
to implementation and it was determined that data domain wasn't 
beneficial enough in the environment to offset the cost. 


>> Are there any concerns or issues that might be good to know up front?  Any
>> lessons learned.
>>
>We did not do TTL.   We ended up with some file systems with lots of
>little volumes, chewed up the scratch tapes, had a lot of free space,
>and was attracting all the writes.  Be sure to implement TTL to keep
>the file systems balanced.
>>

One size does not fit all... my client is not using TTL.   Newer versions 
of the DLm code also do things to keep the usage more even.   There 
are other options ("penaltyup" vs "roundrobin") in the scratch tape 
allocation that can be configured per VTE (virtual tape engine) as well.
I actually use a combination of both (half the VTEs at each setting). 
I am still on an older version of DLm (VTE) code - 2.4 I think and you
would start out on a newer / better version where the file systems
on the back work differently.  

Planning is important. The volser ranges of virtual tapes for example. You
want to way over allocate in terms of pure numbers and not let it be a 
limiting factor later.   You can always add ranges, but then you will have a new
file system that starts off unused or very little used compared to all your
other file systems.   Also, you don't want a a "large" virtual tape size in a
very small environment.  For example, if the total backing file systems
are only 500GB, you really don't want your virtual tape size to 
be 50GB.   When DLm goes to mount a scratch, it has to assume you
will write the entire virtual tape size.  So imagine a back end tape system
with 500GB and 300GB used (plenty of free space, right) - 5 concurrent
tape mounts for scratch would be a problem since that totals 250GB.
Ask me how I know.  ;-) Close to a true life example.  My client's
DLm environment houses 8 sysplexes / monoplex tape environments
and initially we used the same size virtual tape for all based on 40G
STK 9840 physical tape (previous environment was a mixture of VSM
and 9840B/C, with HSM on physical 9840).   Made sen

Re: EMC DLM Data Domain and z/OS

[Richard Marchant]

Lizette,

One of the main selling points of the DataDomain is the Global Compression 
feature (data deduplication). This works well for multiple backups but not for 
archived data which ML2 data effectively is, so in your case using a DataDomain 
at the backend would be a very expensive option. 

Luminex have options for mainframe tapeless solutions that include 'hardware 
compression' which is a much more appropriate solution for archive type data.   

Richard  

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Lizette Koehler
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 3:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EMC DLM Data Domain and z/OS

We are beginning to investigate the possibility of having a DLm and Data Domain 
tapeless solution in our shop.  We are just looking

 

 

If anyone in a medium to large shop is using this, and you would like to share 
your observations with me, that would be great.  We have about 1PB of tape 
storage (mostly HSM ML2 data) between my two data centers.  And I would like 
that data to be replicated to both devices.  I will also have long tern 
retention needs for some  of my data.  I need to have my primary tape data in 
the secondary data center for DR.  It would be nice to have my critical 
development data sent to the primary site just in-case the DR site is the one 
that is down.  Mostly my Source Management files.

 

EMC is suggestion an DLm8000 family and Data Domain for dedup of the data for 
the mainframe.

 

Some questions I might be interested in

 

How is the performance when the data has to be rehydrated?

Is there any significant impact on distances between DD + DLm for DR usage?
What size transmission pipe will make it happy?  Our Primary and secondary 
sites are about 800 miles apart.

 

Are there any concerns or issues that might be good to know up front?  Any 
lessons learned.

 

 

Thanks for any input.

 

You can respond to my private email :  starsoul at mindspring dot com

 

 

Lizette


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Data Domain and z/OS

[Mike Schwab]

See below.

On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Lizette Koehler
 wrote:
> We are beginning to investigate the possibility of having a DLm and Data
> Domain tapeless solution in our shop.  We are just looking
>
> If anyone in a medium to large shop is using this, and you would like to
> share your observations with me, that would be great.  We have about 1PB of
> tape storage (mostly HSM ML2 data) between my two data centers.
We have 4.7T for 10,000 volumes * 50 volumes ranges. 235TB total, 61%
active volumes.  Make sure you activate TTL (time to live) scratch
tape management (when it reclaims scratch volumes as free space).

> And I would
> like that data to be replicated to both devices.  I will also have long tern
> retention needs for some  of my data.  I need to have my primary tape data
> in the secondary data center for DR.  It would be nice to have my critical
> development data sent to the primary site just in-case the DR site is the
> one that is down.  Mostly my Source Management files.
>
We duplicate all VTapes from a DLm 960 to DLm 4080s.  I don't think we
have dedup installed.
>
> EMC is suggestion an DLm8000 family and Data Domain for dedup of the data
> for the mainframe.
>
> Some questions I might be interested in
>
> How is the performance when the data has to be rehydrated?
>
> Is there any significant impact on distances between DD + DLm for DR usage?
> What size transmission pipe will make it happy?  Our Primary and secondary
> sites are about 800 miles apart.
>
Our sites are about 200 miles apart.  Our fiber falls behind during
our evening batch backup window, but catches back up by 7am.  It is
Async, so it is not waiting for responses.  We are upgrading the
fiber, last link won't be in for another 18 months.

>
> Are there any concerns or issues that might be good to know up front?  Any
> lessons learned.
>
We did not do TTL.   We ended up with some file systems with lots of
little volumes, chewed up the scratch tapes, had a lot of free space,
and was attracting all the writes.  Be sure to implement TTL to keep
the file systems balanced.
>
> Thanks for any input.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Data Domain and z/OS

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:

>Lizette Koehler wrote:
>> You can respond to my private email :  starsoul at mindspring dot com

>I cannot.
>IP xxx.aa.bbb.ccc is blocked by EarthLink. Go to earthlink.net/block for 
>details.

Try using IBM-MAIN web page where you can compose a private reply to Lizette. 
You unmark out the 'To the List' and mark the 'To the Poster'.

HTH!

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: EMC DLM Data Domain and z/OS

[R.S.]

W dniu 2013-08-29 15:15, Lizette Koehler pisze:
[...]

You can respond to my private email :  starsoul at mindspring dot com


I cannot.

IP xxx.aa.bbb.ccc is blocked by EarthLink. Go to earthlink.net/block for 
details.

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland






--
Tre tej wiadomoci moe zawiera informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wycznie do uytku subowego adresata. Odbiorc moe by jedynie 
jej adresat z wyczeniem dostpu osób trzecich. Jeeli nie jeste adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomoci lub pracownikiem upowanionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, e jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne dziaanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i moe by 
karalne. Jeeli otrzymae t wiadomo omykowo, prosimy niezwocznie 
zawiadomi nadawc wysyajc odpowied oraz trwale usun t wiadomo 
wczajc w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorised to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive. 


BRE Bank SA, 00-950 Warszawa, ul. Senatorska 18, tel. +48 (22) 829 00 00, fax 
+48 (22) 829 00 33, www.brebank.pl, e-mail: i...@brebank.pl
Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2013 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci wpacony) wynosi 168.555.904 zotych.



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

EMC DLM Data Domain and z/OS

[Lizette Koehler]

We are beginning to investigate the possibility of having a DLm and Data
Domain tapeless solution in our shop.  We are just looking

 

 

If anyone in a medium to large shop is using this, and you would like to
share your observations with me, that would be great.  We have about 1PB of
tape storage (mostly HSM ML2 data) between my two data centers.  And I would
like that data to be replicated to both devices.  I will also have long tern
retention needs for some  of my data.  I need to have my primary tape data
in the secondary data center for DR.  It would be nice to have my critical
development data sent to the primary site just in-case the DR site is the
one that is down.  Mostly my Source Management files.

 

EMC is suggestion an DLm8000 family and Data Domain for dedup of the data
for the mainframe.

 

Some questions I might be interested in

 

How is the performance when the data has to be rehydrated?

Is there any significant impact on distances between DD + DLm for DR usage?
What size transmission pipe will make it happy?  Our Primary and secondary
sites are about 800 miles apart.

 

Are there any concerns or issues that might be good to know up front?  Any
lessons learned.

 

 

Thanks for any input.

 

You can respond to my private email :  starsoul at mindspring dot com

 

 

Lizette


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN