You should talk with another BP that's a little more interested in crafting
a valid solution! With that said... they are right that you missed the
boat on doing this the easy way... the IXS based solution has pretty much
been phased out, but it was a truly simple and cost-effective way to do
what you're looking for. At this point, you'll probably have to get into
iSCSi/blades for a similar solution, but it's still more viable than the BP
is making it sound.
I have not worked with the newer iSCSi/blade based solutions, but on the
IXS cards, the reliability, portability of servers, and backup/restore of
the windows drives was a joy to work with.
"Michael
Naughton"
<michael_naughton To
@juddwire.com> "Midrange Systems Technical
Sent by: Discussion"
midrange-l-bounce <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
s@xxxxxxxxxxxx cc
Subject
11/11/2008 02:39 Windows on an iSeries?
PM
Please respond to
Midrange Systems
Technical
Discussion
<midrange-l@midra
nge.com>
I'm looking or people who know more than I do, so of course I came right
over here :-). My company is looking to consolidate its windows servers,
and I ran across this article:
http://www.infordata.net/inforweb.static/documents/newsletter/ISSE1007.pdf
that makes it sound as if we could do it all on our iSeries (we've got a
model 9406-520). From the article, it looked as if we could
* set up several windows servers using the Integrated xSeries Server cards
* dynamically allocate disk space among the iSeries and the various windows
servers
* use our existing tape backup system to back up the windows data at the
same time we're backing up our iSeries data
Then we talked to our BP, who said it's not that simple. According to them,
** the integrated server cards aren't recommended because they're hard to
upgrade, and we'd be better off with the Integrated xSeries Adapters (and
some boxes to put them in)
** the disk would need to be split between the windows servers and the
iSeries, and we couldn't just dynamically shift it around
** we'd need a separate LPAR to handle the windows stuff
** we'd be better off with a separate backup system for the window stuff
All of which makes it look a LOT less worth it, but I'm not convinced --
hence my question. Does anyone have experience with either of these
environments? Is it as great as the article makes it sound, or is our BP
closer to the mark? If we're looking to
centralize storage, management, and backup, is this a good option, or we
better off just going with a windows SAN (the other option)?
Thanks very much for your help,
Mike Naughton
Senior Programmer/Analyst
Judd Wire, Inc.
124 Turnpike Road
Turners Falls, MA 01376
413-863-4357 x444
mnaughton@xxxxxxxxxxxx
****************************************
NOTICE: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient or the person responsible for delivering to the intended
recipient, be advised that any use is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to it and then delete it from your
computer.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
For more information please visit
http://www.ers.ibm.com
_____________________________________________________________________________
midrange.com
