We are running zVM 5.2 and currently still have manual 3490 tape drives.
We may soon be getting an IBM DS8300 (shared with zOS) with TS1120
virtual tape.
We have 5 VM systems with separate VMTAPE catalogs.
They currently do not have any native physical tape drives planned for
the VM systems.
We
Someone there may be getting confused.
The IBM DS8300 is a virtual tape system. It can work standalone as a disk
based VTS or, in conjunction with the robotics side to make it a tape based VTS
system (with a very large disk cache).
Then, there is the IBM TS1120. These are real tape drives
Hi Ann,
When you say VMTAPE ... I assume you mean CA's VM:Tape product.
If this is the case, just call CA's VM Customer Support or open an issue
yourself for VM:Tape via CASupport so we can get a bit more information
about your configuration and make some recommendations about what the
best
We do DDR's and SPXTAPE every day to virtual (VTS) tapes. Treat them like
physical tapes.
SPXTAPE's for DR - same as using physical tapes: if the spool files won't fit
on one tape you'll need to mount enough scratch tapes for SPXTAPE to use:
vmtape mount scratch 181 dsn jrr.spxtape.1OF3 (retpd
My current CP Owned list looks like this:
Slots Use
1-10 Spool
11-15 Reserved
16-17 Dump
18-39 Page
40T-Disk
41-50 Reserved
I need to double the spool space for upcoming events (z/TPF dumps). I
know that I can use slots 11-15 and 5 slots from the 41-50 range. I
would rather
Richard,
I allocate the first 1000 cylinders of each of my (3390-9) page volumes as
SPOL, then mark it as DUMP space in SYSTEM CONFIG. That would free up your
dedicated DUMP volumes, which could be redeployed as spool.
Best regards,
Mark L. Wheeler
IT Infrastructure, 3M Center B224-4N-20, St
Richard,
You could lose any existing CP dump files that are still in SPOOL when
you reallocate. AFAIK, VMDUMP files go on regular SPOOL volumes, so
they shouldn't be affected. If the existing dump volumes are becoming
regular SPOOL volumes, with the same volsers and slots, I would expect
Thanks for the info.
We did install DFSMS - at least now have an RMSMASTR id.
But the new tape hardware is not yet installed.
But we'll still be using VMTAPE since it manages the tape catalog.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
Still wouldn't be enough in the sequence. Adding those 2 slots would
still leave me 3 short. Other than that, I really don't see the point.
With today's disk architecture, that type of distinction is perhaps
meaningless. Besides, the space is reserved regardless of where it
resides.
Regards,
It's probably me that is confused.
I have been told VM will have virtual tape but no native tape.
They also have used the term 'backend tape'.
I obviously have more to learn.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch
Sent:
Yes I do mean the CA VMTAPE product.
I have opened issues with CA. I need to upgrade both VMTAPE and
VMBACKUP, apply a patch to support encryption and convert to LMP keys.
I've never supported these products but the folks at CA who support them
are very helpful. No problems there. They are great
Ann,
You shouldn't have any trouble using virtual tape with VM or VM:Tape.
We use it here, primarily for VM:Backup and VM:Spool. VM:Spool uses
SPXTAPE under the covers. I'm sure DDR will work fine, too. One phase
of our DR process mounts virtual tapes as FOREIGN on another VM system,
and it
The existing spool, not including dump space, volumes would remain in
place on their current volumes. I do not think that, if there were no
existing dumps, that relocating those two disks to different slots would
be a problem. The system did not even whimper when it came up minus the
first of the
Losing dumps would not be a problem. If there were any, I would log on
to OPERATNS and transfer them to disk before the shutdown.
Regards,
Richard Schuh
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of O'Brien, Dennis
Backend tape usually refers to the tape drives that are assigned and dedicated
to a tape based VTS system. So those tape drives that are dedicated to the
VTS, can't be touched by any other method. They are not attached to the
mainframe, but attached to the VTS.
So, if you are going to create
Thanks. I was hoping to VMTAPE mount the maintenance tapes to the other
VM systems as FOREIGN tapes.
And yes, there will be a VTS at the remote DR site.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of O'Brien, Dennis L
Sent: Monday, March
OK, the fact that one time there were no files on or partly on the disk in slot 16 when you IPLed
with out it does not mean that there will not be the next time. As you have the disks at 16 and 17
marked for dump storage nothing else should be on them. If you are willing to lose all the dumps on
Have you considered how you will get data from the local VTS to the remote VTS?
Smith, Ann (ISD, IT) wrote:
Thanks. I was hoping to VMTAPE mount the maintenance tapes to the other
VM systems as FOREIGN tapes.
And yes, there will be a VTS at the remote DR site.
--
Stephen Frazier
Information
Richard,
Dump space isn't allocated as a static amount - it changes over time. And
there's a limit (I don't recall what) on how many chunks it can be
allocated in. Before I started doing this (years ago) I had situations
where regular spool space became too fragmented to allocate dumps. That's
19 matches
Mail list logo
