response to a hostile Unix Admin's level zero argument.
1995-01-18 20:05:02
Subject: |
response to a hostile Unix Admin's level zero argument. |
From: |
"Joseph A. Faracchio" <SPGJAF AT CMSA.BERKELEY DOT EDU> |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Jan 1995 17:05:02 PST |
Our workstation manager suggested to her Unix administrators that they use
my ADSM offering to backup their Unix (Sun & Ultrix) servers.
And being the *good* Unix citizens that they are they argued (successfully)
that they *have to* do level zero backups and so there's *no* reason to
duplicate backups again with ADSM to VM. (i.e. I could not provide them
with a 'complete' disaster recovery tool that would eliminate their
having to do backups)
So my questions are:
1) is level zero backups on Unix so hard to initiate that they're right in say-
ing that's its very little effort to include all the data (system & user)??
(I argued that they need only backup the OS and ADSM programs & ADSM
could provide the rest in a disaster recovery scenario.)
2) are they going about this in a wrong way by doing level zero backups
and therefore precluding my arguments? (i.e. is there an easier way
of creating a 'bootstrap' backup that could launch them into running ADSM
for a disaster recovery scenario?)
3) what arguments can be made for ADSM even with a level zero backup?
1) good redundancy in case their level zero tapes are unreadable (possible)
2) better / more up-to-date backups if ADSM is run twice daily compared
to level zero backups run every X (where X is every day/week/month)
3) ease of use for individual users on the server (there maybe no users)
4) ???????? more ???????
thanks in advance for your suggestions!
cheers !! ... joe.f.
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- response to a hostile Unix Admin's level zero argument.,
Joseph A. Faracchio <=
|
|
|