Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm
2015-10-04 18:00:05
At 11:05 AM 03/06/98 -0600, John Schneider wrote:
*SNIP*
>Please explain to this novice why, on the one hand, we
>implement a backup strategy to cover the possibility of loosing disks,
>be we ignore the possibility of the backup media itself going bad?
>
*SNIP*
Also, let's not forget that remote host disks do go bad, and that
performing a full restore from an "incremental forever" backup set
will usually result in a extraordinary number of tape mounts and
a correspondingly long restore window. Periodic full backups help
alleviate this problem.
Regards,
Doug
--
Doug Babcock <mailto:babcock AT tmd DOT com>
Doug Babcock <mailto:babcock AT tmd DOT com>
StorageTek TMD, a division of Storage Technology Corp.
Standard disclaimers apply (free copy on request)
To see what I/we do, visit the StorageTek CAM/EBF home page at
http://www.stortek.com/StorageTek/software/cam/camhome.html
--
=========================================================================
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, (continued)
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Mike Wilson
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Smith, Richard
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Tim Dobrowolsky
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, David Hendrix
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, David Hendrix [SMTP:dmhendri
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Kelly J. Lipp
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Randall Eggert
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Prather, Wanda
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Richard Sims
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Kelly J. Lipp
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm,
Douglas E . Babcock [SMTP:babcock <=
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Tim Dobrowolsky [SMTP:tim
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, David Hendrix [SMTP:dmhendri
- Re: The "incremental forever" paradigm, Prather , Wanda [SMTP:PrathW1
|
|
|