I meant the staff were incompetant not the methodology. -----Original Message----- From: "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 14:22:11 To:[email protected] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT: DR strategy question
Me small firm. Me has never considered Mirroring...Disk/Raid. etc etc... anything other than a good server hardware setup. It's not DR. It's just good quality server hardware is all for the time that the adaptec card starts screaming like a banshee when drive 1 dropped off.... Disk imaging is DR Backing is DR Online back is DR All of these are DR... not having a secondary DC is seen by some to be insane DR but we in SBSland also know that having one DC means we 'can' image the dang thing (giving ~Eric a heart attack nonetheless). But to me RAID has never been a disaster strategy of any kind. Heck I'm not even sure I like the folks that break a mirror just to patch. They are incompetent not because they are a small company that has grown huge...they are incompetent because they've gotten some stupid idea that RAID is anything other than a. Ant spray b. Good quality server hardware best practice Mark Parris wrote: > *What are the scenarios they've developed that disk mirroring > addresses (at least in their minds?)* > > *Incompetence* – they are basically a small company that has grown > huge and the processes and management leave a lot to me desired. The > disk mirroring is used everywhere all servers, all drives – everything > is mirrored. Screw performance. It’s a New Application, So that will > be a new server and some more mirrors then…. Oh and the other reason > is they use ArcServe – with every box having different levels of agent > and they all……. I could go on and on and on and on and on. Time I got > back into banking I think. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Al Mulnick > *Sent:* 11 February 2006 00:03 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] OT: DR strategy question > > I am absolutely fascinated by this Mark. What are the scenarios > they've devloped that disk mirroring addresses (at least in their minds?) > > I know I'm getting ready to delve into some of this one more time [1] > and I'm always interested in adding one more crazy idea to the wall. > > [1] more or less for fun this time. > > On 2/10/06, *Grillenmeier, Guido* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> What would the impact be on AD if they plugged the OS and >> Application disks back in after 3 months or after AD tomestoning? > > well, I'd say AD won't have too much of an issue with it at all - > however, they'd have to reset the Exchange Server's machine-pwd or > rejoin it to the domain since it will likely not be able to create a > secure channel. > > Not sure how the Exchange server itself will react to this time-warp (it > would likely cough up a bit)... but it doesn't sound like a scenario > that would hurt your AD. > > Certainly important not to use this approach (using a mirror-disk) for > AD DC themselves (could be a potential solution if you could really > guarantee that you'd pull the disks from all DCs in the forest at the > same time - highly unlikely and certainly not recommended). But I'd > certainly also question this approach from a long-term > cost-perspective... > > /Guido > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] On Behalf Of Mark Parris > Sent: Freitag, 10. Februar 2006 13:02 > To: ActiveDir.org > Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: DR strategy question > > Where I am working at the moment part of their DR strategy consists of > breaking a mirrored pair and keeping it in a fire safe in the event of > server failures, I have managed to get them to drop this idea for DC's > but they still insist on doing it for other servers. Application servers > I don't care about but I do care about the Exchange server , they are > only pulling the mirror on the OS and the Application and not on > logfiles etc, as these are on raid 5. What would the impact be on AD if > they plugged the OS and Application disks back in after 3 months or > after AD tomestoning? What is the impact on the other files on the other > disks. The org is E2K3 and W2K3 too. It smells of deep deep sh.... to me > but, I want quantification. > > Mark > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > -- Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days? http://www.threatcode.com List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
