We are looking at installing a 3484 library and VTS to replace a bunch
of conventional 3490's and 3590's. My understanding is that the VTS
tapes and tape drives cannot be used by anything except the VTS. A set
of FICON cables connects to the VTS controller to support communications
with the virtual 3490E devices hosted by the VTS. Having said this, it
is also possible to add an second, standard tape controller, with its
own FICON channels, and additional tape drives in the library portion of
the solution. The second controller and its drives could then be used
like normal tape drives. The robotics are capable of serving both the
VTS drives and the normal drives, but the operating system sees them
as two different sets of entities.
Tom Rae
Senior Director, Technical Services
Western Canada
Loblaw Companies Limited
Information Systems Division
Notice: This e-mail transmission may contain confidential, proprietary
and/or legally privileged information and is intended only for the
individual or entity named in the e-mail address. Any disclosure,
copying, distribution, or reliance upon the contents of this e-mail not
authorized by the sender is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this e-mail transmission in error, please immediately reply to the
sender, so that proper delivery of the e-mail can be effected, and then
please delete the message from your Inbox.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch
Sent: August 29, 2006 12:36
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Sharing an IBM 3494 with the LAN side
Because my understanding, is that our FICON channel cables go from the
z/890 to the IBM VTS. The VTS then has a connection to the IBM 3494.
Do we have ficon channels to both the VTS and the 3494? If so, would
this allow us to directly write large backups to the 3494 instead of
staging thru the VTS?
I assume that there is an IP connection from the 3494 to the mainframe
for management purposes, perhaps also to backup the configuration
files and catalogs back to the host.
Tom Duerbusch
THD Consulting
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 8/29/2006 1:20 PM
Tom,
Why do you think the mainframe doesn't talk to the 3494 ... it does
via DFSMS.
JR
JR (Steven) Imler
CA
Senior Software Engineer
Tel: +1 703 708 3479
Fax: +1 703 708 3267
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 02:15 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Sharing an IBM 3494 with the LAN side
We have been looking at an IBM VTS with the IBM 3494 robotics unit as
a
backup solution for the mainframe side (z/VM 5.1, VSE/ESA 2.7, VSE/ESA
2.3, zLinux (Suse 9)).
Just been having a hard time comming up with the money to pay for it.
The network side, is now, also asking for a robotic unit. The plan
there is to backup all the local and remote servers to the SAN box and
then backup to some sort of robotic unit. I don't know the details
what
else is involved.
So, it got me thinking
If we buy another tape controller for the 3494 with FCP attachment and
we would have to buy additional tape drives (as the drives are
dedicated
to a controller), could we share the robotic 3494? I don't think we
can
share the VTS, but that's ok.
Is that doable? Has anyone tried and suceeded?
Then, going off on another tangent.
Since the mainframe doesn't actually use the 3494, it only has ficon
channels to the VTS, could the VTS talk to the tape controller in the
3494 using FCP connections? If so, can the FCP connections be shared
between the VTS and the LAN side? (meaning, I may be able to
eliminate
a tape controller and its dedicated tape drives, that is until the
load
requires us to have more than 4 tape drives).
Or, from a cost perspective, is a LAN based robotics system just too
cheap to even consider upgrading a mainframe based IBM 3494 system?
I'm only looking for a first cut response (yes, no, perhaps).
I need to reread the manuals (with this requirement in mind) and look
at associated cost issues.
I wouldn't mind having FCP connections to the mainframe for the zLinux
side. It may (or may not) make backups easier over there.
Tom Duerbusch
THD Consulting
