Ah. Looked up the two terms. No, I have not really done an "in-depth" formal
investigation of those, but I would say that I really don't want to lose ANY
of the data, period. A recovery time of a few hours should be acceptable,
but I'd certainly like to keep it under 1 business day. After that, people
are going to start getting impatient, I believe, for access to certain
business-related files (spec sheets for carpet, etc.) As previously
mentioned, I also want to have our email store on the storage appliance, and
while I'm sure our ISP would be more than happy to act as the backup email
host, it would be better if we didn't have to keep our email on their
servers any longer than necessary. In addition, if I back up user's desktops
to the network (most likely using folder redirection) they might get a bit
"antsy" if they don't have access to their files. J

 

So, no, no FORMAL RTO/RPO, but I don't really want to lose *any* data and I
want to restore functionality as soon as humanly possible. I don't want to
take a week or more to get a new SAN installed if I can possibly help it.
That's too long. I would say up to 24 hours (including weekends, if
necessary, but preferably not!) would be the maximum "down time." Most of
our operations run on the AS/400, so there would be little business-critical
data on the Windows side of things, but a lot of business-IMPORTANT
information that would be hard to replace.

 

John-AldrichTile-Tools

 

From: Kevin Lundy [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:37 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN question

 

John - have you completed a business impact analysis?  Derived RTO and RPO?
I think that will go a long way towards helping define technical options as
well as the finances.

 

To try to design the technology first, in my opinion, is putting the
proverbial horse before the cart.

 

Kevin

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 10:28 AM, John Aldrich <[email protected]>
wrote:

No, I have not narrowed it down. I initially hoped to get the project done
this year, but the economic downturn has hurt our cash flow such that we are
in a "holding pattern" on any "discretionary" spending and the SAN project
certainly falls into that category.

 

You bring up a good point about what happens if you only have one SAN and it
goes down. That's one reason I was thinking about having a "D/R" SAN at a
remote location. We do have a remote location about 30 minutes away. Another
option would be to co-lo the D/R SAN with someone. I just got off the phone
with a Global Crossing rep who wanted to talk to me about things they could
do for me, especially in the way of conferencing, etc. We got to talking
about the IT priorities for the next couple years and I mentioned the SAN
project and asked if they provided online backup services. She said that the
only thing they could offer would be co-lo space and that got me to thinking
that maybe that might be the best of both worlds. co-lo the D/R SAN at a
professional co-lo facility.

 

John-AldrichTile-Tools

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:14 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

 

If you are just backing up to tape and your SAN goes down, where will you
restore too? Do you have a spare disk pool to use?

If it was "me", I would be looking at a SAN solution that offers its own
proven DR solution.

Since I only know NetApp, they have a tool called SnapMirror that is built
into the OS. You pay for the license and plug in the serial.

Then setup your DR targets and let it rip. If your primary SAN goes down,
you can do some clicks and bring the system online with all your data ready
to access.

 

But you seem to be talking about a lot of things you want. You want DR, you
want clustering. If you cluster, maybe you only need to backup to tape.
Unless you want to buy a clustered SAN and a DR SAN. Of course if you are
going to have a DR SAN, I assume you have a DR location?

I mean if the building burns to the ground do you have a location with the
resources needed to keep the company running? Not just hold the data?

 

Have you narrowed this down to 3 vendors yet?

 

From: John Aldrich [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 6:52 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: SAN question

 

Guys, I'm still working on my storage needs, as the project I've been
working on probably won't get approved until early next year at the
earliest. I was talking to a D/R consultant recommended by one of the folks
on this list. Unfortunately, he does not work with SMB clients, only large
clients such as Coca Cola, etc. 

 

I had been thinking of getting two SANs and having one replicate to the
other for D/R purposes. Most of our operations run off the AS/400 so that
would not be much affected (except if we are able to some how back up to the
SAN, which is unlikely with our current AS/400, due to disk space
limitations on the 400) one way or the other by the SAN project. The
aforementioned consultant suggested that we look into getting just one SAN
and a tape backup for it or online backup service instead of doing two SANs.
Most of the data on the Windows side of things would be hard to replace if
it died, so while it's not "critical" to our operations, it's still highly
important.

 

What do you guys think of that suggestion? Would any of you guys do
something like that? Why or why not? 

Also, anyone know any D/R consultants in the North Georgia area who work
with SMB clients?

 

John-AldrichTile-Tools

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

<<image001.jpg>>

<<image002.jpg>>

Reply via email to