Re: Sharing an IBM 3494 with the LAN side
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
Re: Sharing an IBM 3494 with the LAN side
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? It works, but it's a real kludge to operate it. You can partition the library and install some SCSI tape drives and some channel-attached, and the open systems folks can use the SCSI ones, and the channel-attached portion can use the rest. The drives can be only one or the other, and it's a physical board swap to change personality from SCSI to channel-attached. It's also a royal pain for your tape librarian to figure out what is allowed in what. No standard IBM zSeries operating system other than Linux supports SCSI tape. I submitted a requirement for 34xx emulation on SCSI drives in VM via both SHARE and WAVV. Or, from a cost perspective, is a LAN based robotics system just too cheap to even consider upgrading a mainframe based IBM 3494 system? Depends on how you maintain it. Enormous SCSI-based tape libraries are very cheap, but cost a lot of space and power if you have to have something else for the mainframe stuff. The IBM ones are expensive, but can be shared, albeit awkwardly.
Re: Sharing an IBM 3494 with the LAN side
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
Re: Sharing an IBM 3494 with the LAN side
To throw another wrinkle into this The IBM VTS is supported by zSeries as well, as Win/NT, Win/2000, AIX, Sun Solaris, HP-UX. I'm printing off the manuals now to see if the unit will support these environments, shared, at the same time. That would be a great solution. AND There are new VTS units now. The TS7700 and the TS7510. If the B10 doesn't do what we want, these new units might. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting
Re: Sharing an IBM 3494 with the LAN side
We do this. But not with a 3494. We have a 3584. A fraken-monster! It is truly bleeding edge and we have the scars to prove it. In our shop, this thing has four parts. There is a VTS for the z/OS system, FICON connected. There is a VTL (Virtual Tape Library) for the distributed systems, Fibre Channel connected. There is an ATL containing 3592J drives. The ATL itself is subdivided. Some of the 3592J drives are FC connected to the VTS for its use as backstore devices. Some of the 3592J drives are FC connected to the SAN fabric for the distributed systems, which are running CA's BrightStor. The last of the 3592J drives are ??? connected to a J70 controller which is FICON connected our z/OS system for off-site backups. The VTS and the VTL talk to the ATL over an internal ethernet/IP network, mainly to tell the ATL to mount and dismount tapes (I think). The VTS and ATL talk to z/OS OAM (a started task) via the FICON connection. OAM uses some undocumented-to-us-normal-people channel control program functions to talk to the Library Manager to request mount/dismount. The distributed systems talk to the same Library Manager via Ethernet/IP. I think the same can be done using the older 3494. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
