Tag Archives: TSM

Competition Example Architectural Decision Entry 1 – TSM backup configuration for PureFlex environment?

Posted on by
Reply

Name: Ash Simpson
Title: Virtualization Architect
Company: IBM
Twitter: @Yipikaye1
Profile: VCP4

Problem Statement

Which is the ideal method for TSM backup for PureFlex environment? LAN free backup or LAN based backup or both?

Assumptions

1. IBM PureFlex hardware is used

2. Physical TSM server exists within PureFlex.

3. External (Virtual) Tape Library available on PureFlex SAN Fabric.

Constraints

1. Customer has selected PureFlex Infrastructure as hardware platform
2. IBM storage must be used – Storwize V7000 and IBM DS8000
3. ProtecTier VTL available and should be used

Motivation

1. Flexibility of Choice based on specific application requirements requirements.
2. The configuration to be deployed has the capability to support both.
3. LAN free backup is getting popular option in the industry.
4. LAN free backup negates the need for large backup windows.
5. PureFlex V7000 allows for FlashCopy Manager (FCM)
6. FCM is application aware for many critical Intel workloads such as SQL and Exchange.
7. All Backup I/O is retained within a single PureFlex Chassis

Architectural Decision

Deploy LAN free backup and LAN based backup infrastructure in PureFlex environments with LAN free backup via TSM for VE and FlashCopy Manager as the default. Should a particular application have the requirement for LAN based backup, the infrastructure can support it.

Host the Physical TSM server and an ESXi Host with the TSM for VE server (via affinity rule) in the same Chassis.

For the few servers requiring LAN based backup agents use affinity rules to prefer ESXi hosts in the same PureFlex chassis as the TSM server.

Alternatives

1. Provide LAN based backup only

2. Provide LAN free backup only.

Justification

1.Better utilization of network bandwidth in LAN free backup.
2.Improved performance for backup and restore operations is possible in LAN free backup.
3. LAN based backup is still required by certain applications, hence it is recommended to retain this feature.
4. Hosting TSM server in same chassis as proxy/agents prevents North/South network I/O.
5. FlashCopy Manager will reduce backup times by creating application aware snapshots on the storage array.

Implications

1. The hardware infrastructure will have to be configured for both LAN free and LAN based backup. For LAN free backup the SAN fabric in PureFlex system will be used for backup environment. The backup server transfers data from its storage directly to the tape device via FC.

2. Fibre Channel ports needs to be dedicated for backup traffic

3. Separate Zones needs to be configured in the Fibre Channel Switch module environment for backup traffic.

Back to Competition Main Page or Competition Submissions

Example Architectural Decision Competition – Submissions

Posted on by
Reply

All suitable Example architectural decision submissions will be posted here, please vote for your favourite decision by leaving a comment on this page with the example decision number.

SUBMISSIONS FOR ROUND 1 (Closed!)

1. TSM backup configuration for PureFlex environment?

2. Use of RDMs in Standard IaaS Clusters

3. Scalable network architecture for VXLAN

4. vCloud Allocation Pool Usable Memory

5. New vSphere 5.x environment

6. Improve Performance for BCAs on Cisco UCS

7. (More Coming Soon)

WINNER ROUND ONE: Use of RDMs in Standard IaaS Clusters by Chris Jones @cpjones44

This design decision works around some fairly strict constraints, such as no >2TB LUNs, no IP based storage & the inability for monitoring solution to be customized.

While the decision is ultimately fairly straight forward, the decision documents the issue well and justifies the decision and discusses in depth the implications of the decision.

This is an example of a fairly obvious decision (considering the constraints) but shows even where a decision may be obvious, or the only option, that understanding the implications is important. Documenting even obvious decisions is also important so in the event of movement within the team, the solution can be understood by people not involved in the original design process.

RUNNER UP ROUND ONE: TSM backup configuration for PureFlex environment? By Ash Simpson @Yipikaye1

Not unlike Chris Jones’ decision, Ash’s submission works within the constraints of an existing environment, where hardware and software has already been purchased. This is a common issue, where Hardware / Software is purchased before a detailed design phase. This is a huge problem in the industry and I encourage you all to ensure this trend does not continue. Without a detailed design phase, it is not possible to confirm what hardware/software is required, as such hardware/software should only be purchased after the design to completed.

Again this decision is fairly obvious given the constraints, but the decision explains the benefits of this method of configuration and discusses the implications which is important.

The constraints did not list anything preventing purchasing of a different backup solution, although this is somewhat implied by the assumptions.

Congratulations to Chris Jones @cpjones44 & Ash Simpson @Yipikaye1!

Thank you to everyone who submitted design decisions, and I encourage you all to submit new decisions for Round 2 and am looking forward to new competition participants.

SUBMISSIONS FOR ROUND 2 (Closing 31st October 2013)

1. (More Coming Soon)

2. (More Coming Soon)

3. (More Coming Soon)