On 23/04 2002 17:38 Frank Smith wrote: > --On Tuesday, April 23, 2002 15:26:33 +0200 Toralf Lund > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 23/04 2002 14:52 Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > >> Yes, maybe a good decision. (Although the purchase of new tapes and the >> management of all of them do add up to a non-negligible cost.) > > While the cost of sufficient tapes is certainly 'non-negligible', and > can actually be much greater than the cost of the library you put them, > company management has to weigh the cost of tapes versus the cost of > losing data. > Sooner or later you will need to restore something. How much is it > worth to be able to do that? There is much data that can be (somewhat) > easily recreated, and other data that is irreplaceable or would take so > long to recreate that you would be out of business before it could be > recreated. > If you don't have enough tapes to be comfortable in the ability to > restore your data (and just because you have one copy doesn't mean you > will be able to restore it), then get more tapes. If your management > doesn't see the need, write up what you need and why, and be sure to > save the response if they disagree, since your head is on the line > if critical data can't be restored. Many good points, there. These are exactly the considerations my backup configuration is based on, really.
I suspect that a lot of people back up their data because conventional wisdom is that they should do it, whereas the backup strategy really ought to be based on an assessment of the cost of backup and recovery vs the cost of recreating data. - Toralf
