[Info-vax] The new world that VMS will be living in

[Mark Berryman]

On 12/7/20 3:09 PM, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> On 2020-12-07 20:24:57 +0000, Dave Froble said:
> 
> 
>> Yes, one can lose data on computers.  But one can mitigate the 
>> situation with reliable backups and other procedures.  In the cloud, 
>> one might not have such control of data protection.
> 
> If you need or want local servers and local storage, go for it.
> 
> If you want rid of local hardware and/or local staff, host it.
> 
> Given AWS can meet US HIPAA requirements, higher-end hosting options are 
> available.
> 
> Irrespective of what some might want, OpenVMS is going to have to 
> operate hosted.
> 
> Which is part of why I've grumbled about the difficulties around and the 
> security around installations and deployments, but I digress.
> 
> And yes, we've all heard about both hosted losses, and about local data 
> losses, and about disaster-tolerant clustering, and about local and 
> hosted service outages.

Data loss can be protected against.  For me, the real issue is the 
number of instances (that have been reported) of the major cloud vendors 
saying "oops, we accidentally leaked this customer's data".  AWS is the 
vendor I've seen this happen to the most.

Another issue that will need to be resolved is the performance of VMS 
backup.  I use an LTO7 tape library for backups, which has a theoretic 
maximum transfer rate of 300MB/S.  On a DS15, with a 1GHZ cpu clock, I 
can't get any more that 75MB/S.  On an RX2620, with a 1.6GHZ cpu clock, 
I can't get any more than 95MB/S.  In both cases, the rate limit was hit 
because the backup process had maxed out the CPU.

By comparison, when I backup my Mac to the same tape drive (all systems 
are part of a SAN) I get over 200MB/S.

It seems to me that a speedier file system and backup program will be 
needed as VMS moves into larger storage capacities.

Mark Berryman