Out of a large Blueprint, the advertisements are for 80 terabytes of ingest a day, then there are the replication pieces, and the scalability of your database capacity, etc. We have not quite topped out any of those maximums yet, but we have hit our maximum of what the server will do. So we have starting scaling horizontally across a couple of other environments.

As far as how it scales, it maybe didn't quite meet what we thought, but everybody is different. Everybody's shop is different. Our Oracle Databases, our workloads, Exchange Servers, etc. are going to be different than others'. We understand that, which is why you get the “it depends” answer from everybody when you talk to them about how much it can do.

I want to see it work, touch it, feel it, and PoC it, then we can know how it works for us. Everybody is different. All shops are different, even though they run a lot of the same gear.

It is pretty scalable. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. So we are protecting like 10,000 plus objects.

Depending on the customer, the solution is for all types of businesses, including enterprise, medium, and small businesses. They always use Spectrum Protect for protection. There is a limitation in the database for Spectrum. You have a database extension for every new version. The biggest problem is when you have millions or billions of small objects to archive and retrieve, you reach the limit of any product.

The platform is incredibly scalable. We can add as many devices as required. We can manage multiple servers and databases. It can manage database stores for large-scale enterprises. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

Being enterprise-class, IBM Spectrum Protect can scale up and scale out depending on our needs. 

It supports redundancy, ensuring data can be stored in multiple, secondary locations for added security. This allows for easy expansion and compatibility with a variety of disk storage systems, including those with petabyte capacities far exceeding our needs. 

Additionally, it supports both virtual tape libraries (VTLs) and physical drives, making it a versatile solution.

IBM Spectrum Protect is used by a broad range of users within our organization. Directly, we have around 30 to 50 specialized administrators and people who use it intensively on a daily basis in the system department. 

Additionally, business users, database administrators, and application users also interact with it to some extent. Overall, the entire IT department, comprising a couple of hundred people, utilizes IBM Spectrum Protect at some level.

This remains to be seen because we are actually going through a cloud migration process. We are looking at options which will allow us to tier out the cost as well as put another Spectrum Protect in the cloud for data protection backup out there.

With our transition and initiative to go to Azure Cloud, Spectrum Protect's functionality is not there yet for native Azure Cloud integration. We have found out that it is definitely in the road map for native integration to Azure. It is just whether or not it will be there on time for us.

I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten. Almost everything in my organization is getting backed up by IBM Spectrum Protect. We have thousands of users. We need ten administrators for maintenance.

Scalability-wise, IBM Spectrum Protect is a seven out of ten for me.

IBM Spectrum Protect is highly scalable, ranging from small environments with just a few servers to large-scale deployments with up to 3,000 servers.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

It is very scalable. It scales very high as well. It is an enterprise-class solution. It is one of the most scalable ones.

We have 10 to 15 customers who have their own TSM server and products, and then we have about 18 customers who back up to our servers.

The solution’s scalability is good. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. Almost 20 employees in our organization use the solution, including IT specialists, backup engineers, and senior backup engineers. We will most probably increase the number of users in the future. However, it depends on our customers’ feedback.

The scalability of the system is exceptionally high, making it suitable for deployment in any enterprise environment. It can be utilized in a multi-site and multi-instance setup, with no inherent limitations. In the present project, we manage a user base of twenty-five thousand individuals and the company operates globally around the clock. I would rate it ten out of ten.

I have found IBM Spectrum Protect to be highly scalable, it can scale up to 1,000.

This solution is scalable. It is a very good solution for mid-range and enterprise customers. It is suitable for a broad range of different environments and types of customers, verticals, and other segments that can implement this product. 

IBM Spectrum Protect is scalable. There are archives on the flash that goes into a queue, and when it's available, it goes into flash and retains it for seven days then into the normal storage.

Scalability becomes somewhat limited with the growth of the database, but we are still able to run with only one instance on one database, although we are reaching the limit. We have thousands of users. We have three network administrators dealing with the solution. I'm an analyst and the others are service administrators. 

It's definitely scalable. 

It is definitely scalable.

It is definitely scalable. We are a service provider for another company, which has about 2,000 to 3,000 users. 

For its deployment and maintenance, we have 18 team members. We have 24/7 support. We have a couple of L3s, and the rest of them are L1s and L2s. 

Scalability-wise, IBM Spectrum Protect is basically for large enterprises.

In terms of scalability, it doesn't matter how much you throw at it, it just handles it. The product doesn't require that much in terms of resources. There is no overhead CPU consumption unless you're doing deduplication and stuff like that. It is not heavy, resource-wise.

I am the main backup administrator and the only one who is using this product. I run it for the company. Currently, we are backing up between forty and fifty virtual machines on Tivoli. If I want to leave and let the schedules run then I have a second IT person to monitor it.

The usage will not increase because the solution is being phased out, and all of the backups are moving over to the new product. Before the end of the year, it will not be used anymore.

It scales until the next frame must be purchased.

The growth plans are given by the user. In science, you never know what the next step is. We are struggling against newer experimental setups. This is great for the scientists, but if you double the resolution size for microscopy, it ends up with a lot of more data on our side. However, we serve our scientists, so we just purchase new.

We have been impressed with the scalability.

Our environment is huge. We have a large AIX Windows environment, and it is growing every day.

If we build our servers correctly when we refresh our environment using a PowerNAS, Spectrum Protect will definitely be able to handle our growth.

We have approximately 30 servers right now. It will always be our solution for our midrange Power boxes. As we grow with Power servers, we are going to stay with Spectrum Protect as it is growing with us. We are going to upgrade a bit more aggressively than we previously have, because we are excited about the newer stuff coming out.

I didn't have any issues with scalability, it has been good.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a four or five out of ten. More precisely, I rate the solution's scalability a five out of ten. The low rating is due to its inability to integrate with the cloud providers today. So, if the integration is within an IBM cloud, it is good, and if it is outside IBM cloud, it is really bad. Also, most of our clients are enterprise-sized ones.

The solution is highly scalable. An organization that needs to expand the services should be able to do so without any issues.

The solution doesn't have a high user count. Rather, it is used by our IT department to protect our organizations' data. No end users would have access to it. About 10-15 people from our storage and data protection team have access to it currently.

It's very scalable from the data and the client's perspective. The scalability on the process integration side is not equally advanced.

Four engineers in my company are using the solution. It is a really scalable solution. We can scale it up. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I am trying to categorize it as a workstation, backup software, or data center backup software because they are all different. If you categorize it as a workstation kind of backup software, then definitely it's not good in scalability terms. As we are trying to evaluate it as a data center, it becomes a different story and gets complicated.

HAProxy is scalable. There's nothing that we cannot do with it. The entire IT department has access to it, so that's upwards of 100 users.

It is very scalable.

The solution can scale, however, it's a matter of the license you have. That said, if you need to expand, you can.

It is scalable.

If you are attaching with IBM products, it is all compatible and very easy. Issues arise when you are working with non-IBM products. Then, you need to find all the APIs with the Spectrum Product. There are some issues with HPE and Dell, because these two do not support Spectrum Protect. You have to be on certain versions before they will support integrations.

Spectrum Protect will meet our customers needs as they grow, because as the data is growing they need to have a backup. We are talking about on-premise backup, we are not talking about cloud backup. We are discussing out of the country backup. There are tapes which are getting shipped out of the country with an encryption key. Spectrum Protect is playing a vital role, because they do the encryption. It is a very reliable, consistent, unhackable product. 

Scalability is excellent. This is one of IBM's strength.

The scalability is extremely good.

IBM Spectrum Protect is scalable.

There are about two to three direct users for the backup who are the admins.

For the Spectrum Scale file system, we have more than 500 users who use the file system with two admins for staff to deploy and maintain. Of course with backend for both from IBM.

This solution is being used heavily because we are a 24/seven shop, so it's heavily used and we always go and refresh the technology.

Scalability is good. 

Yes, it is scalable. It is scalable with Db2 and it can be scalable with the metatext.

It's not a scalable solution. For example, if I need to move to a better host or if I need to move my database that gives them the metadata, then I would need to move the IBM Spectrum Protect database to another storage spot. So, I would need to do a backup and restoration of the database. There is no scalability in the backup server.

I can't move it to another host without downtime. I would need a minimum of one day of downtime to move the database to another storage spot or to move the server to another server. I can't build another host and then switch.

We do plan to increase usage because there are more backup needs.

We work with all sizes of businesses from Fortune 100 insurance companies to small colleges and universities. We have all sorts of customers.

The scaling potential of the solution is huge. This is an enterprise solution compared to some of the smaller options. It also scales down when you do less than 100 terabytes. It has very favorable pricing. It's competitive with other products.

It is pretty scalable. It will scale to anything. There have been no problems. 

Everything so far has been really good. It is very scalable.

I am managing two instances of Spectrum Protect.

We had more than 1000 IBM Spectrum Protect users in our environment. The scalability is low for process integration. Apart from that, it provides good scalability.

Scalability is good.

The scalability has been great. We were able to introduce and scale from the storage pools, as well as from all the backup infrastructures.

The solution is scalable.

IBM Spectrum Protect is a scalable solution.

Its scalability is decent. In terms of usage, we used to be exclusively all Spectrum Protect, but now we're not. We just have one department that is using it, and they don't do any restores or anything like that. I do everything. Because it has a small footprint now, I am the main person who works on it, and if needed, I have a couple of other people to help out.

the solution scales frmo small setup to enterprise hosting many thousands of clients. Competitors need more resourses, as it has difficulty to host the inventories, of manage the amount of data If needed, one can add storage agents, which can be used to off load data transfer, so that the data goes over these agents, instead of being sent to a central server

I've never had issues with scalability. It scales very well.

It has scaled with us over the last 25 years. We are a community college with about 40,000 students and roughly 5000 to 6000 employees. It is growing, though not as much right now. The economy is good, and we grow when the economy is bad. The exact opposite of everybody else!

Scalability is fine, as long as you bring up the right server. We have some Linux servers that don't scale as well. Our AIX servers work much, much better. We're backing up about a petabyte a night.

The scalability of the solution is very good. A company can expand the solution if it needs to.

IBM Spectrum is used in the data center and we don't have too many users that would use the backup facilities. Everything is centralized to enter the data center.

We are not fully using the solution to its full potential at this time. I'm not sure if there are plans to increase usage. We're looking into other options to see if we can get better user-friendly functionality and better pricing.

It is extremely scalable. This is why we like it, because a lot of other products require a more complicated deployment as the environments get bigger. 

Spectrum Protect keeps things rather simple, because as long as we build the core system, it can scale with the hardware, essentially. We use Power Systems for our servers. Therefore, it can scale massively, as well as the application. Thus, we keep our costs low.

The solution will definitely meet my customers' growth requirements. However, the challenge I have is that customers are becoming more homogeneous and need diversity less. This has worked more for us as we take on workload for them, but I have a lot of customers who used to need five or six different types of enterprise integration: workload, virtualization of different platforms, etc. However, this all seems to be getting more homogenized. Therefore, the need has been going down from what we have seen previously.

It is very scalable for my need, especially when you can just buy the hardware attachment. It is very fluid. To increase, as long as all the performance issues are taken into account, you can add as much you want. You can really scale it up in a lot of areas. The only issue I have with scalability is for the small offsite locations. You have about 50 different companies and you would never consider using Spectrum Protect in them. 

Our primary use centers are using Spectrum Protect instances. We run two Spectrum Protect instances.

We have spec'd out our build, and the cost of it can work quite easily today for our future needs.

I have never had any scalability problems with it.

In retail and management, I manage around 30 Spectrum Protect instances at this time. The company is planning to grow and I expect the product to handle it.

It scales infinitely. I have customers that are protecting less than 100 terabytes of data versus customers that are protecting petabytes of data. Provided you size your hardware solution properly, it will work with any organization.

In terms of scalability, we have been using it for the last five years and the scalability is very good. I like that.

I did not encounter any scalability issues.

Scalability is good. The product is so scalable and vast. 

They need to do a better job on Windows, because if you are running Windows, the scalability is more limited than AIX and Linux.

We plan to add on more Spectrum Protects in the future.

It use to scale to IBM systems only. Now, it scales to non-IBM systems or other industry servers, like Intel. So now, scalability is quite good.

We used silo our Spectrum Protect servers, but now we are consolidating them into fewer servers because they can handle more loads.

Scalability is a given because we have solutions for our data centers, mainly in the tape area, and tape drive-based solutions. We have disk-based solutions at remote sites. We are using containers and replication for central data centers. Therefore, scalability is given, and we are completely satisfied with it. Our group manages the infrastructure for the company.

We have maybe 500 remote locations, then we have six data centers with multiple solutions. Therefore, we have maybe 600 to 800 Spectrum Protect instances.

We always grow by an average of 30-35% per year. It is not always in new server systems. It is an increase in backup storage, but very often we have to add new Spectrum Protect systems, too. We feel the product can grow with us.

The solution is very good in terms of scalability. We are running almost a petabyte of data protection for our solution, so it's pretty stable. From a scalability point of view, it has plenty of options. The solution will work for any entry to mid-range customer.

We had to look at the scalability as we wanted to expand. You need to purchases extra licenses if you want to expand. 

Spectrum Protect is used to back up our infrastructure on the backend and is not directly related to the number of people in the company.

I have not seen any big issues. I sometimes handle the tape library, unloading and loading tapes. and it is very predictable. 

We recently had a situation where we quickly got code, and the number of tapes exceeded the library capacity so we were waiting a while to change. We got a fix for this right away.

We only have a couple servers, but loads of nodes and Clients (hundreds of them). We have some domains, active directories, backups, and shared drives. The shared drives are big. Since driving the recovery scenario, where someone deletes something off of their shared drive, it is not just that person's data but it's a whole department's data.

It scales from very small to very large. It is easily the most scalable product out there.

It's really scalable. Great scalability.

No. You just need to have the servers and backend SAN storage with which to scale. $$$

IBM Spectrum Protect is a scalable solution.

We have not scaled it yet, because we already have enough storage capacity. Since the scalability will be online, I know it will be fine. There should not be any downtime. 

For time being, we have enough with the storage of IBM and SVC. At least for next three years, we have enough storage with what we have already.

The scalability of IBM Spectrum Protect is good.

We are backing up approximately two petabytes of data using IBM Spectrum Protect.

The scalability is solid, provided we setup the infrastructure as needed.

High availability (HA) is a challenge, but we do deploy it in certain situations. We tend to stick to a more traditional scale up model rather than a scale out model, but we have managed to meet our requirements for this, so scalability has not been a problem other than when people ask for HA solutions. Generally, we have managed to meet our requirements.

We definitely are experiencing scalability.

It seems very scalable and robust. It can do what we require it to do.

I currently have eight instances of Spectrum Protect installed on the servers that I manage.

It scales well. We have grown here in the last year or two, and it has been relatively easy.

No, scalability is one of its key capabilities.

I think from the server side, it scales very well. The client side is much more difficult to deal with. It's a lot of hands-on work with the client.

No problems.

The solution can scale well. If a company needs to expand things, it can do so with ease.

We just count the servers in terms of usage. In terms of the servers, I would assume we have more or less, about 400 servers with 1.5 petabytes of storage.

In terms of scaling, we'll remain the same more or less, however, as the databases grow, we tend to increase the amount. We don't have new features and functions that we want to integrate, however, we have new services. We are growing and likely expanding.

It is scalable. The scalability also depends on your network architecture, etc.

It is scalable beyond anything my customers ever aspire to.

We expect the product to meet our growth needs.

This depends on size and how big the environment is. If this size good, there are no issues to scale out.

We are well under what the capability of it is. We are a mid-sized shop with hundreds of servers, not thousands. We could do more, it just depends on how much money we want to spend.

We will probably grow in data, but not in numbers of systems. I am sure it is going to go more towards VMs and SUSE Linux. The servers are getting smaller, holding more data. Also, I am hoping we get off of tapes. 

Scalability is excellent.

It has medium scalability. Most of our clients are medium-sized companies.

This is a scalable solution. We have 25 users in the company. 

Scalability in not an issue for this product. It is a real enterprise class backup software.

Scalability is one of the best features of this product. An IBM Spectrum Protect environment (a DB2 instance) can manage up to 4PB. Sometimes it is more practical to define several instances of DB2 (several DB2 databases, several TSM servers) on the same physical server, which drastically reduces the size of the DB2 databases.

I have worked with it for 15 years. I have found it to be very scalable. Where I work now as a business partner, our customers use it. I have some small customers and some large customers, and it works well. Where I used to work before, we ran backup as a service, and we had about 21 instances of Spectrum Protect running. It was just reliable. That is my experience.

The customers who are doing workloads in the cloud are choosing to have cloud-based backup strategies. It is an area in the product where our competitors may have better offerings right now, but the people who are moving to the cloud, if they are doing it well, are choosing not to have their data in the cloud be static. They are using the cloud to spin up a workload and spin it down. Thus, the workloads are being provisioned as opposed to needing to have static data in them. Therefore, the real value is the code which generates the machine running in the cloud, and we backup that.

We are now looking at the new product. Before, it did not have a lot of options for Exchange, SharePoint, etc. With the new Spectrum Protect Plus, it seems like there will be more options and they are catching up with the market, and that is a good thing.

I have worked with it for 20 years now. It scales well for the amount of clients that we use with it. The clients have been very good about keeping up with the technology changes.

It should meet our future needs. We do not plan to grow it at this time as we just use it for SAP. 

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

When there’s too many clients connecting at the same time, or the platform does not meet requirements.

Spectrum Protect is scalable, you just have to be careful when migrating data and so on.

This solution is scalable. 

If you want to get the maximum benefit out of it, you should be a big organization. In my opinion, it is not for a small organization. 

IBM Spectrum Protect is scalable. 

In terms of the scalability, with the latest version of IBM Spectrum Protect, now they have all these cloud features available. It makes it easier for you to plug into.

We have about 10 main users. We have three or four unrestricted users. For deployment and maintenance, about four or five guys on the ground. 

The product is very extensive. We've implemented it about three or four years ago. At the moment, the number of sellers in production increases every day, day in and day out.

We keep on spinning up new services and all we do is onboard the new servers. We've not had any complaints because of capacity. It has been able to serve our clients' purposes.

It is working great. Our database moves on 2.5TB and is still performing well. There are no worries about it.

We have roughly 30 instances for different purposes and different subsidiaries. We are using some Spectrum Protect servers only for library manager purposes to cover all these multiple parts, which have for storage agents and this is sometimes gets to its limit. It is not a well-known limit, but if you have more than 28,000 passes on one server, the performance decreases. That is what we found out and we try to keep it under this limit.

Scalability is poor. As you get to bigger environments, this is where our gaps have been introduced. As we have grown over the past couple of years, the gaps have become more apparent. For example, RTO is a huge gap for us. If we had a disaster scenario and had to recover a bunch of stuff from tape, the RTO would be too long for us.

The more we grow, our gaps will become more apparent. For future needs, as we grow, Spectrum Protect will become a less viable solution for us.

We have not really had a chance to properly scale it, but I imagine it should be fairly straightforward in terms of growing it out, e.g., we spec'd out a server that was really powerful.

In terms of scalability, the next thing should be adding additional storage.

We currently have one Spectrum Protect instance, but in the future, there will be at least three or more.

It is scalable.

The scalability is huge. It's maybe the most scalable backup of all products on the market. It's in the petabytes per server. They have the best tape libraries per square meter and capacity per square meter. You can scale in the exabytes with these solutions. You will have to have multiple servers, but most of the exabyte scale projects that we've looked at are IBM.

The blueprints are awesome. From everything that I have see out there from competitors' products, Spectrum Protect scales significantly higher than anything else that I have seen.

Spectrum Protect will meet our customers' growth plans.

We have a pretty big setup. There are users across ten servers. I'm not sure exactly how many there are in total.

There have been scalability issues. The core product does not support scale out. We needed to create a new system and manage resources separate from the existing one.

Scalability is pretty much unlimited.

One client with a distributing environment has 130 to 140 instances. Another client has probably somewhere between 10 to 15.

This scales quite large.

The scalability is really good. It is very capable, it has high availability, multiple backup servers, many posts, and workloads.

The scalability is better than my legacy TSM 7.2.

Scalability is excellent. It is a solution which needs to be designed. For example, when you design something, you usually have a more scalable solution, because you are building it into the initial plan. Therefore, it is very scalable, but the downside is that it costs money.

The product can scale. I have seen 20 to 40 percent growth per year for my customers for the next three to five years.

There were scalability issues only in the brand new features which were recently released.

They continue to make enhancements that allow it to scale even larger and higher. They also added additional capabilities to the software that allow it to grow within the industry.

This solution is more suitable for medium and large infrastructures, in my experience.

While it does depend on the environment, for the most part, the solution scales easily. The operating system, hardware, et cetera, make it compatible with all the vendors.

IBM poses a challenge to the scalability, since a bigger environment requires an increased TSM database, primarily when it comes to long term retention. Our customers occasionally require permanent backup retention and this places an increasing burden on the size of the solution's database, which makes things challenging to manage. 

No issues with scalability.

Scalability for Spectrum Protect has been another strong point for it. When I took over the team, we had just three instances in production. As we have expanded worldwide, we have grown to more 14 instances. Scalability has not been an issue as we have grown.

It's highly scalable. 

The product is scalable. However, the customer's infrastructure is usually not scalable. Therefore, the environment (server, tapes, etc.), not the product, limits the scalability of the customer.

No.

It's very scalable. We can start the product with 10 machines and we can manage more than 1000 machines. There are no limitations with respect to adding agents. The only thing we need is the addition of some resources for the backup server. For example, we can start with a backup server with 16 gigabits of memory and when we add many jobs and many agents to the backup, we have to add some resource tools to the backup server.

Scalability needs some work in some areas. The number of volumes needs to be increased drastically. That's number one.

No issues.

It can scale from very low to very big using one instance. One can use StorageNodes (a media server) to further extend its capacity by avoiding sending data traffic to the backup server.

For the company where I provide support, they are kind of "hold-back". But we could do more with it. They are just not giving us all that we need.

No issues with scalability.

No issues with scalability.

The solution is really scalable.