On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Alex Polvi wrote:
Also, we are leaning toward using spinning disks instead of tapes. We
have systems at a few different co-locations and do not have the man
power to administer tape-driven backups across our entire infrastructure.
Are there any advantages of bacula and tapes that might make us reconsider?
Tapes are less susceptable to rm -rf (*)
Tapes in data safes are less susceptable to fire. (**)
Tapes in large autochangers are low changeout load (pull a magazine, drop
tapes in safe, add tapes from safe, drop back in changer.)
LARGE tape systems are considerbly cheaper to run than equivalent
disk-based systems (Disk is still good for spooling and allows multiple
simultaneous backups to happen, keeping the backup window narrow)
Colocation is irrelevant, your tape changer can be centralised provided
there's sufficient bandwidth to run the backups. The fire/rm -rf argument
also applies, if the backups are being held at a location separate to the
server/desktop farms.
(*) The most famous case i know of involved a NZ ISP whose webservers got
trashed - along with all the disk based backups. Lots of very public
embarrassment and TV coverage.
(**) Many companies never recover from fire-caused data loss and
permanently close their doors shortly afterwards
AB
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
