On 03/06/2007, at 4:29 PM, gspurge wrote:
With what I have described, the server ceases to be mission critical. I can run the surgery without "the server", at least for a short time. The programs I mentioned will seek out their database as long as physical connection exists.
I agree that this is the best way to do things, and is the crux of what we must do in a failure. However, when the central server is a monolithic one, as is often the case, keeping the database running is the easiest and only a small part of the job.
Some of the servers we manage are not only database servers, but authentication, print, file, web, e-mail, routers, VPN terminators and the rest. In this situation a complete snapshot is invaluable.
It's preferable to have an architecture where smaller, probably virtualised servers are dedicated to a task, and none are difficult to recover.
Peter.
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
