On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 13:02:58 -0400, Stan Horwitz <stan AT TEMPLE DOT EDU> wrote:

>On Sep 13, 2006, at 12:21 PM, Werth, Dave wrote:
>
>> Steve,
>>
>> If it's important enough you might want to look into WORM (Write
>> Once Read
>> Many) technology for these backups.  That would insure the media
SNIP
>> you to lose that information
>
>Dave, you bring up an interesting point. This topic underscores the
>need for all of us to make our respective management aware of the
>distinction between backups and archives. This is a point I am
>constantly reminding my colleagues about.
>
>I point out that our backups serve one and only one purpose: to
>recover a server in the event of a disaster with minimal data loss.
>Those who want to implement an archive solution, need to look at
>options other than traditional backup technologies, as you suggested.
>
Totally agree with Stan re difference between archives and disaster 
mitigation. However tape can still be acceptable for archiving if your 
design is right, more important is making sure you can still access data 
after 7 years and still have an application (and hardware to run the 
application) to use it!

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the
body of the email. Please write to networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu 
if you have any problems
wit this list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER