Interesting topic, one that I feel will continue gaining ground throughout our community within the next couple of years.......
Our target operating model for development is separate frames and data center locations from production. We don't replicate them as of now but I have heard some talk of doing so. Seems overzealous on the surface but some of our applications each have development/test/QA/UAT partitions in the promotion path and their development is so frequent that extended downtime to any one of their lower level DEV environments would be very costly.
For our lower tier applications there is no reason to replicate their respective development partitions. In the event of a disaster we would completely rebuild from backups or build a new partition and restore their development libraries only.
These are the questions I would be thinking about:
1) Do you have a mutually agreed Recovery Time Objective (RTO) and Recovery Point Objective (RPO) for your development environments?
2) Is the RTO greater than the amount of time it would take for us to reconstruct a development partition in the event of a catastrophic failure?
3) Can we meet or exceed the development system's RPO for all relevant data that was saved to a backup device? In other words, can you tolerate the lost data between the failure and the most recent backup?
***********************************
Bradford Lovelady
Operating Systems Engineer
Technology Infrastructure Services
Wells Fargo Bank l 200 Wildwood Pkwy l Birmingham, AL 35209
MAC W2691-010
Tel 205-938-1999 l Cell 205-826-2834
brad.lovelady@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Wells Fargo Confidential
This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hart, Doug - EI
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 8:50 AM
To: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: HA of Development LPARs
We have 25 LPARs of which 8 are development/sys test. These are on a good size 740 (terabytes of DASD). We run HA (MIMIX) for our production LPARs.
My question is does anyone run a full HA environment for their development? With all of the redundant hardware, software costs, MIMIX licenses, bandwidth, and overhead of supporting more partitions I just can't see how it is justified. We are a manufacturing company.
Comments please.
________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachments and/or linked documents, is intended for the sole use of the intended addressee and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise protected by law. Any unauthorized review, dissemination, distribution, or copying is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the original sender immediately by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of ITT Corporation.
--
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.
midrange.com
