Hi, I have been following this thread with much interest. We are in the scenario of running both TSM AIX and OS390 servers. We are looking currently at standardising on one or the other. Both have their plus ponts. OS390 is very good on tape management (dfrmm) and via netview, rexx and infoman problem alerting. For example we pick up on backup failure messages and also backups that have not started within an hour of their scheduled start. However it does have two drawbacks as far as I am concerned. It is a fairly limited market for TSM so it is not going to get top resource for development As already identified it will normally run on an lpar with a mixed workload and may accordingly suffer from resource constraints. AIX is not my area, but in broad terms I believe it is not so good on the tape management front The AIX guys use an external scheduler ( MAESTRO) and scripting to achieve a similar level of alerting to backup failures. The big advantage that I think they have is that they run TSM (actually ADSM, in their case) on dedicated boxes. What I would reaaly love to know is if there is anyone out there running TSM on OS390 on a dedicated lpar, and if so whether they are very happy /happy/ or just ok with the performance . Thanks, John
"Seay, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/21/2002 04:34:33 AM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: (bcc: John Naylor/HAV/SSE) Subject: Re: Benefits of moving to platform other than OS/390 OK guys, you are both right. Doug your frame of reference is from a S/390 point of view as a general computing platform. Clearly S/390 is a better platform for all the reasons you are talking about. Daniel is speaking purely from a TSM point of view, I think. I love these kind of discussions. -----Original Message----- From: Doug Fuerst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 4:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Benefits of moving to platform other than OS/390 I don't believe you are correct. 390 I/O rates are generally orders of magnitude larger than UNIX as there is simply much more I/O being performed. Personally, having experience on both, I find 390 much easier to administer, and the security is much more robust. And I don't work for IBM either. 390 processor utilization is a product of the workload, and adjustable via tuning. If your ADSM environment was not being dispatched properly, then either you had a mistuned 390 system or an undersized processor, or both. 390 is indeed a transaction processor par excellence, but is no slouch in the I/O area, but it is indeed "optimized" for this environment, as DB2 and CICS would not transact very well if it was not. UNIX may be better at interactive applications, but I don't think it is better at I/O, transaction, or batch processing. And a 390 is infinitely more scaleable, and now can run Linux anyway. And one 390 box can replace a whole bunch of small UNIX servers. Just my $.02 Doug At 02:18 PM 3/20/2002 +0100, you wrote: >Hi > >As far as I can see, moving do a UNIX platform only has positive >effects such as: > >- Higher throughput. Normally, the S/390 guys only allows a minor >amount of memory and processor utilization to be used by ADSM/TSM. This >is not a problem when running a UNIX box. > >- The UNIX boxes normally have higher disk and tape I/O than a S/390 >system. Dont ask me why, but I have seen this in environments where TSM >had existed on both UNIX and S/390. > >- Administration of a UNIX box is normally easier, and you don't have >to have a IBM representative doing all the work. > >- S/390 is optimized for transactions, UNIX is optimized for >disk/tape/network I/O. > >Best Regards > >Daniel Sparrman snip>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.. Doug Fuerst Consultant BK Associates Brooklyn, NY (718) 921-2620 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ********************************************************************** The information in this E-Mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It may not represent the views of Scottish and Southern Energy plc. It is intended solely for the addressees. Access to this E-Mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any unauthorised recipient should advise the sender immediately of the error in transmission. Scottish Hydro-Electric, Southern Electric, SWALEC and S+S are trading names of the Scottish and Southern Energy Group. **********************************************************************
