|
Jim, Thank you. IBM/Tivoli recognized that the PASE api's for tape support were a severe bottleneck for tape drive performance of TSM under PASE. Do you have any performance data from someone who has moved from PASE to Linux? Like, what used to get x bytes/hour now gets y bytes/hour? I would never expect performance of TSM to equal a native SAV... command because of all the extra logging, etc. However, TSM PASE takes about 6 hours to fill a 3582-L23 tape (BACKUP STGPOOL). That's a big yawner compared to an hour and 10 minutes of the native SAV commands. I was hoping that IBM would fix the PASE api's. But IBM is sinking no dollars into PASE. Their only goal is to sucker vendors into using PASE as an easy way to port their applications over to i5/os. Perhaps this is why TSM gave up on PASE? Rob Berendt
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.