Eliminate backup windows

3rd time i am trying to post.. so this time it will be very brief.

1)Open files can be mananged by various software on the market. Most backup software come with such a open file manager.

question is what open files do you have and is there a need. eg SQL comes with a hot backup agent which you can install without additional costs.

2)No the solution provided add an additional cost of replication windows which can be just as consuming as a backup window.

3)Mirroring is a good choicebut it will only take a single disk within the mirror to fail to cause the entire mirror to fail.

4)The most ideal solution would be to use a snapshot utility that would take a snapshot of the data and place it on a second array. The image will be updated with only the changes. You could make multiple images for various times/dates. and then use a tape drive to backup.
This is not like replication (file level) but block level so is more effective.

We use a dated OS called OpenVMS to do our backups and restores on a 24X7X365 basis, as we have worldwide users that access files all of the time they are at work. In the past 9 years, that I have been here, we have restored 100's of files that users have managed to destory/delete, with no-problems. Windows xxxx are utilized on this main storage facility for the company's software development efforts, and VMS is responsible for maintaining security and integrity of this valuable data, NOT Microsoft. And viruses are not a problem on the main servers.

I noted that Zee mentioned this as well. I've seen and dealt with the issues of agents, database dumps and all that goes with them, and now in NetWare at least the snapshot technology has let me eliminate the use of agents in most cases, apart fromalways used databases, which I still need agents for.

The only problem with NetWare's snapshot is it's only as current as the last time the file was closed, although I don't know what snapshot alternatives there possibly could be. At least I don't have to worry about a window for that closer anymore, as if I'm sure the file will be closed at least once per day, I know I've got a pretty good copy to go with.

Excellent article! I only will add that there are several more advantages of data replication that will justify such a solution to the backup window. Lets consider application tests without using the production data sets.

A few more things to consider -

What if the system - or application - crashes in the middle of a batch update?

What happens if the network goes down in the middle of a transaction or posting operation?

WHat happens if a program update trashes the data and you need to not only restore a prior version but back out erroneous updates to the database?

What happens if a new employee spends the day entering the wrong information into a customer master record or employee benefit application that updates ten or fifteen other databases?

These things happen all too frequently and require more than frequent backup or even database mirroring. Now you 've gone beyond backup and restore, you're in true recovery territory. At this level, applications need to be designed with recovery in mind. Transaction boundaries need to be defined and commitment control needs to be integrated into the applications to deal with partial updates.

Databases need design also - do you need to journal files? If so, do you need before-imaging and after imaging so you can back out erroneous changes?

Recovery planning is more than preparing for hardware or network loss or failure, it covers a myriad of perils, including the untested program change, malicious user and runaway job.

Hope this tickles some brain cells and maybe saves someone's job who has sold their management backup systems as complete recovery planning.

Has anyone noticed that we have
* super low cost
* highly reliable
* hot-swappable portable hard drives
* USB, SCSI or IDE

So why is anyone now designing backup systems based on tape?

Where once you had a tape volume, now simply mount a disk volume. OK, if you are talking huge server farms with 20 tape drives, I dunno whether HDD is a viable option. But for all my small business clients, with one maybe two servers, hot-swap HDD is the way to go.

And as pointed out in the article, you can replicate while the system is running. If you want a REALLY clean replicate to take away, and would rather not swap with key applications open, OK, you can close your apps for 60 seconds while you swap out the replicated drive.

Maintain a pool of replicated drives - just as tape pools are maintained only 100x faster, more reliable and (but wait there's more) direct rather than sequential access so MUCH easier & quicker for those pesky single-file restorations.

Is there anyone out there who actually likes waiting 30 minutes or more for the tape to locate the required file?

ps Many good points in the discussions, especially rollback design within databases - reading that shot me back 20 years to pioneering days as an vendor Systems Engineer specialising in Relational Database, when "real" databases were all network hierarchical...

And by the way, the chap who thinks that one dead drive in a mirroring arrangement will kill the system - er, that doesn't seem right to me.