Currently we are backing up out machine with CommVault to a Disk Library
and this Library is replicated to a second location.
My only Problem is that the Desaster-Recovery-Backup (SAVE 21 equivalent)
of CommVault creates about 8 DVD Images which i have to burn in case of a
full system restore. this images restore the base system and the commvault
agent. after that i can restore the rest.
this procedure makes me not feel very happy ;-) and i have not tested it.
so we are thinking of a vtl (quadstor) solution additionally to the
commvault backup, where we can do a full backup. so that we can do a quick
full system restore in case. but we always have the fallback to use the
commvault procedure with the dvd-rams that have to be burned. in the later
case we also have support from commvault if something goes wrong.
what i found out is that this would cost us only about 500€ for the two
used controllers and the cable, which is not very much.
the only thing i am afraid of is that my as400 gets crazy when i connect
to the vtl-tape drive (i have made some bad experience with using
usb-sticks for backup connected to the as400) and that there are problems
when i use this type of solution on a daily basis. and i dont want to have
a problem with the stability or support.
greetings,
franz
From: "DrFranken" <midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion"
<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 19.03.2019 14:24
Subject: Re: quadstor vtl with as400
Sent by: "MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
First I did not think that that VMWare allowed direct access to
hardware. So how do you make the FC adapter available to the VTL
Software? Since it appears that's been done I must be wrong in this
regard. Curious to know hot to that.
More importantly though this is the backup to IBM i, the computer most
likely to contain exceptionally valuable data to your business. Backing
it up is of paramount importance. In a disaster you need to be able to
get that data back 'with the quickness'. Having to potentially rebuild
storage of VMWare. Then VMWare. Then this VM. And finally, only then
could you even BEGIN to start restoring IBM i..... I can't see how one
of these in any virtualization layer would be a backup I could rely on.
And consider then that this VTL being on VMWare would need to be backed
up itself or you wouldn't be able to restore IT! So you would need a
backup of a backup! At the very least you would want it replicated off
site.
- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis
www.Frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service.
www.iInTheCloud.com - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.
On 3/19/2019 7:38 AM, Holger Scherer wrote:
We had some issues with FC login which also might have been an issue on
the VTL
software (early stage when testing IBM i compatibility), after that a
lot of changes
to the VTL software have been made. So these problems might have been
solved.
But personally i would prefer a direct hardware as there always might be
an issue
with the access to the QLA adapter in the VTL hardware...
The direct setup (with older IBM x3650 and HP DL360 boxes) works great.
-h
Am 19.03.2019 um 12:36 schrieb Franz.Rauscher@xxxxxxxxxxx:
Hi Holger!
Thanks for the quick repsonse.
were there any problems with the virtualized setup other than
performance.
so could this lead to instabilities on the as400 side.
we can only do it virtualized.
the last thing i want to rist is instability on the as400.
midrange.com
