🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <L-VMCTR%92050115160861@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU>, Wendy Alberg
<WAXY@CORNELLC.BITNET> says:
>
>Martin Doyle asked:
>>                              ....  Is there anything with the new
>>ESA versions of these products that makes them any better than the
>>old versions?

(deleted)

>VMTAPE/VMARCHIVE/VMSPOOL quartet, the only significant ESA-related
>support is in VMBACKUP, which now supports the Shared File System in
>CMS 8 and asynchronous CSL calls during SFS backup and restore.  (By
>"significant ESA support" I mean stuff that SCI doesn't lump under

The Asynchronous calls will be a benefit, but I can't see paying two
and a half grand for that support.

The interesting thing is that SYBACK runs just fine under ESA 1.1, which
leads us to ask "Why exactly DOESN'T VMBACKUP run under ESA 1.1?"
There is no provision made for those customers that convert to ESA 1.1
that do not wish to get all the enhanced (perhaps) support from the /E
product.  Why can we not go on using VMBACKUP release 5.3 without all
the whistles and bells?? After numerous phone calls with out SCI rep
we still don't have a good answer from them.  The only reason release
5.3 doesn't work under ESA 1.1 is because THEY DON'T WANT IT TO.  There's
no technical reason why it shouldn't.  Those people paying the upgrade
charge are just paying the development costs that SCI should have figured
into the prices of all their products.  I think if we don't get some
satisfaction pretty soon, we will just use SYBACK and be done with it.

>  From SCI's publicity stuff, I conclude that the marketing division is
>using ESA as a convenient cutoff point at which to increase the prices
>on their VM....... line.

You hit the nail on the head!

>  VMBACKUP:
>    New ESA interface support:
>      SFS support for CMS 8
>      Asych CSL calls
>      STABLE and EXCLUSIVE minidisk link modes

Fine, but not worth all they are asking for the upgrade charge.

>    New commands:
>      SUBMIT/HOLD to supplement START
>      ORDER - change order of waiting backup/restore jobs

(whoopie- adding a little functionality that should have already been
 there)

>    User exit enhancements:
>      New exit VMBEXIT5 - pick which tape to use next if VMTAPE's not enabled

This has been a user enhancement request for a long while I think...
it's about time it arrived.

>      EXITs 1,2 & 3 can now return a whole number as a return code

Yes, this was severely cramping my style?   anyone else's ? (:-)

>    Hardware support:
>      DASD: 3390-3, 9345
>      tape drives: 3490E
>      Enhanced Automatic Cartridge Loader (ACL) support

New equipment comes out, they SHOULD support it.

>    Misc enhancements:
>      Can ask that tapes already written to in current job not be remounted

This is just so the Automatic tape loaders don't get confused

>      Formats a minidisk even if no files are found to be restored

This is available for 5.3 as a ZAP - (enhancement request for years)

>      A job can be restarted with fewer streams than job template specifies

I suggested this a while ago, but not for the reasons one might think
We backup up around 13,000 cms minidisks a night and since VMBACKUP is
so woefully inefficient with storage, if the job died and restarted for
any reason, with 4  streams going we would never be able to finish
since we would suffer FRE004 abends (until we cancelled the job)

Now that VMBACKUP 5.3 can run in an XA/ESA machine we can get more
storage to use... this is basically whitewashing the problem.
We asked our SYBACK people if they were going to support larger
machine sizes... their answer was why?  Syback doesn't have a storage
problem... which is true..

These problems have really left a nasty taste in my mouth, I really like
VMBACKUP and the ease it allows in restoring files for non-technical
types.  But this whole fiasco with the upgrade charges has soured me to
the company.


Robert