On 05/12/2013 10:26 AM, Michael Tiernan wrote:
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Skylar Thompson
<skylar.thomp...@gmail.com> wrote:
How do you define reliability?
I think that that's a darned good question. Skylar's pair of points
misses a key definition. As a guy from Keane that I used to work with
said, no one cares about backups, they only care about restores.
Isn't reliability predicated on being able to extricate a file (or
files) from an archive (always assuming 100% fidelity to the file
contents) in a period of time, usually measured only in hours, in a
consistent, regimented (i.e steps written on paper) and highly
repeatable manner?
I think someone else pointed out that the tool to do the work is only
part of the solution. Wouldn't backing up to cassette tapes be
considered reliable for multiple values of "reliable"?
I *do not* know the answers by any means. I'm learning and asking
questions to help learn more.
This is absolutely true. The quip "nobody cares about backups, until you
need to do a restore" is spot on for this discussion.
Skylar
_______________________________________________
Tech mailing list
Tech@lists.lopsa.org
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
