|
 |
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:06:42 +0000, Phil Cook wrote:
> And lo on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:42:52 -0000, Jim Henderson
> <nos### [at] nospam com> did spake, saying:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:40:28 +0000, Phil Cook wrote:
>>
>>> It all depends on what level of back-up you require. Heh my favourite
>>> is a company that used the grandfather/father/son system of backups,
>>> but reused the tapes. So Day 1: GF, Day 2: F, Day 3: S, Day 4: GF etc.
>>> I'm sure you can all see the problem.
>>
>> Palindrome?
>
> I don't recall.
I recall from my NetWare 4 days that it was one of a very few that used
GFS style backups - which are/were more popular on mainframe systems.
>> That's one package that used GFS backup strategies - it can work, of
>> course, as long as your tape rotation is appropriate to retaining the
>> full backups.
>
> And that of course was the problem, if on day 4 the tape got screwed
> they'd have no full backup until they managed another backup. It never
> occurred to them if the server failed between those two points they'd
> have no full backup available.
Ouch. That's gotta hurt.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
