Mainframe backups TODAY by Brecht Arteel (pro-art)
Mainframe backup TODAYA study for lowering backup costs in mainframe environments(c) 2011 by Pro-Art bvba – Brecht Arteel – email@example.com
Introduction Is the Mainframe dead? Has it resurrected? Applications migrations planned? Presentation based on a Pro-Art bvba study: an inquiry with companies within the Trends top-50 (Banking, Retailing, Manufacturing)
Mainframes anno 2005 Most mainframe users predicted to use the mainframe just for a little longer Mainframe usage was still strategic for most users Mainframes still in use within major industry markets (banking, retail, manufacturing, ...) Planned application migrations towards Open Systems? Microsoft .Net? Java?
Mainframes anno 2011 Importance of mainframe usage remains strategic Old customers orderred additional mainframes or replaced the “old” ones (based on an inquiry in the top50 Belgian non-it companies) Application migrations failed or have proven to be not cost-efficient Most users confirm that their mainframe remains important and will stay for at least 3 more years.
Mainframe backups? Mainframe backups still happen rather traditionally Connectivity is not a problem (ESCON or FICON) Performance is hardly an issue Capacity is almost never an issue (no rich content on mainframes) Is there an issue then?
Mainframe backup challenges Low volume but critical content, small tape cartridge capacity, many slots (SILO) Mainframe plays a vital role in batch processing, reliability is key, a second copy of the backup can be important No global backup policy for mainframe and open systems Dedicated backup hardware for the mainframe only is not cost-efficient (OPEX and CAPEX level) Backup SILO robots like the StorageTek Powderhorn has a very large footprint in your datacenters Duplicating tapes consumes MIPS
Example Banking customer with an IBM Mainframe, around 1 TB backup data (all retention together) ESCON connected tape drives & robotics Backup Infrastructure in use was out-dated Cost per TB of backup data was 1000% more expensive than open system backup costs The actual costs where – compared with the costs of the mainframe itself – small Tape handling for off-site backups was mandatory due to the importance of the data – extra costs To them, no clear gain to make
2 Approaches possible Leave all like it is (no problems & cost is relate to the mainframe cost in total) Try to align open system backups & mainframe backups Backup tool can not be changed Non-intrusive is mandatory Cross-platform backup infrastructure (mainframe & OS) ESCON should be possible (FICON boards not common and expensive) Robust & proven technology
How to start? Calculate costs of current hardware maintenance / year Estimate lifetime of the mainframe in place (how long will the MF still be used) Total cost = caculated cost x expected lifetime If total cost > 150k euro then GO DO NOT caculate using cost/TB, as mainframe backup is always much more expensive than Open Systems backup
Solutions - Luminex Luminex Channel Gateway Support for open systems Uses existing disk storage as backup media (cost efficient) Emulates native MF tape drives such as 3480, 3490 or 3590 tape drivesWeb: www.luminex.comlocally (close to Belgium) noreal presence and knowledge
Solutions – Bus-Tech Bus-Tech (currently EMC) Mainframe Data Library (MDL) MDL-2000 and higher when in need of more than 1 ESCON port Emulates tape drives known to the MF NFS towards external disk array (use existing storage!) Supported: IBM z/OS, MVS, VSE, VM, TPF and Unisys OS 2200Web: www.bustech.comimplemented locally byMainstorconcept who has in-houseknowledge
Solutions - IBM IBM (using Diligent technology) IBM System Storage TS7680 ProtecTier Dedupe GW Deduplication on-board ESCON or FICON host connections In-line dedupe Clustering is possible Scales up to 1 PB Back-end storage is IBM only Not (yet) able to go direct to tape Not (yet) able to replicate between systems
Solutions - Fujitsu Fujitsu Eternus CS High End C5 (fka CentricStor) Multi-platform solution Using internal disk arrays Disks mainly used as “cache”, off-loaded to tape, independent of the backup solutions Fully redundancy, replication and clustering possible High end, High priced
What to choose? If only mainframe must be optimized then: No IBM Storage? Go for Luminex or BusTech IBM Storage? Stick with IBM If Open Systems backups are also under stress Budget is tight: Luminex or BusTech Budget is not related to savings only: consider Fuijtsu
Example – what did they do? The banking customer as discussed earlier did: Calculation showed that ROI would be reached after 3 years, including HW purchase, 5 years of maintenance on the new solution (based on BusTech MDL – 2 units), usage of Tier1 storage for keeping the backups and implementation costs Total implementation was less than 1 week RDP is possible in 15 minutes (involves only changing the NFS mount !!) Floor space gained over old tape infrastructure Off-site shipment of backups in-line with open system backups Global Conclusion: NO BRAINER
Questions? If you think you can gain from replacing your old large footprint MF backup hardware then do not hesitate to get in touch: By email: firstname.lastname@example.org By phone: +32 476 32 85 11 Other questions? Ask them after the presentation or drop us an email.