Attachment uploads are currently disabled. This is a temporary situation and will resume as normal in the coming days.
Solved!
Go to SolutionR
rusty_feo2
10 Posts
0
1877
March 20th, 2017 12:00
Mainframe Data Domain - 2 heads
Okay first I let me say I might be missing a piece or two of the architecture. What I am trying to figure out is - redundancy within the DD.
let's say we have DD9500 with ONE HEAD servicing 500 TiB of storage and structured into 5 MTREE; replicating to an identical system 347.8 miles away.
If I loose the functionality of the DD9500 head - I loose access to the mainframe library is supports.
Redundancy in the head I believe to be in 4's CPU/FAN/RAM/POWER.
One of the reasons I ask is that normally new storage in configured with a new head.
I do not consider it a "redundancy" of the original DD9500 head.
How should one consider redundancy for the DD head
Rusty
rusty_feo2
10 Posts
1511
0
Posted June 4th, 2019 11:00
Thank you for your replies.
Having spent now some time with HA heads here is my summary:
1. Having HA heads does not eliminate a filesys failure, found out the hard way of course over Thanksgiving Holiday.
2. Upgrades have several options. Normal is both heads are engaged in the upgrade process at the same time.
3. We prefer to
- failover to the Seconday,
- upgrade Primary
- Failover to Primary
- Upgrade secondary
We think as time moves on the DDos upgrade process will get better when it involves a HA head.
ble1
6 Operator
•
14354 Posts
•
56186 Points
1618
1
Posted March 21st, 2017 05:00
If you wish to have redundant head, you have failover head (but this is always active/passive setup and comes at price).
I think if your head is gone, it would be replaced soon in case of such failure (and you can always request spare parts on site if paranoid, but it will cost you).