Networker

Re: [Networker] backup scheme

2006-09-27 09:59:32
Subject: Re: [Networker] backup scheme
From: "William M. Fennell" <william.fennell AT CHANNING.HARVARD DOT EDU>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 09:55:31 -0400
Hello,
This scheme may sound risky, but the alternative is outsourcing to a
group that takes one full.
They do incremental backups every day.  They never do another full. 
Maybe I could do a full every six months.
Our particular issue is we never delete data.  It just stays on the
network in case it is ever needed.  That means we continually
backup chunks of data that never change once added to the network.

Bill


Conrad Macina wrote:

>Davina is right. You could mitigate the risk somewhat by cloning the annual
>full, but a year is an awfully long time for tapes to be lost, damaged or
>just "go bad".
>
>Conrad Macina
>Pfizer, Inc.
>
>
>On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 11:56:54 +0100, Davina Treiber
><DavinaTreiber AT PEEVRO.CO DOT UK> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>William M. Fennell wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>We're thinking of doing full backups once yearly,
>>>level 1 monthly, level 5 weekly and level 9 nightly.
>>>Are there any Networker gotchas that would present a problem with this
>>>scheme?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>From a NetWorker point of view, your scheme would work. You might also
>>want to consider assigning different retention periods for these level
>>backups, and putting them in pools that correspond to the different
>>retention period. Suddenly your config has got a whole lot more complicated.
>>
>>
>>>From a practical point of view, I would NEVER do this. If I was your
>>boss I would fire you for this.  ;-)
>>You would be placing a huge reliance on one full backup. If a tape goes
>>bad from your full backup you have lost the capability to restore all
>>your backups for up to a year. I get jittery about having full backups
>>less frequently than weekly, but on problem clients (such as perhaps
>>those backing up over slow WAN links) I might consider a schedule with a
>>monthly full and a weekly level 5 or similar. I would never risk
>>anything less than a monthly full. Most companies' data is far too precious.
>>
>>
>>Good luck - you might be needing 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
>>    
>>
>
>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
>  
>

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>