|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Invisible wrote:
>
> For anyone who's interested...
>
> 1. They want to keep backup tapes (even differentials) forever. (No
> regulations require this.)
>
Ask why they want to do this. You were not in the meeting where they
decided to do this. They should be happy to tell you.
> 2. They want to allow the vagaries of the Gregorian calendar and its
> lack of synchronisation with the 7-day week affect when our backups do
> and don't happen.
Ask why?
>
> 3. They want to keep the weeks' tapes in the server room until the end
> of the week.
>
Provide your observations about the potential risks to this choice, and
the benefits of alternatives.
> 4. They want to verify that tape restoration works by restoring a
> standardised, unchanging 0.09 KB file and performing a visual inspection
> to check that it "looks the same". (In fairness, if the backup software
> says it's restored, you can be 99% sure it's fine. Usually if there's a
> problem the software will complain that it "can't" restore the file,
> rather than restore gibberish. But even so...)
>
Be nice, and give constructive feedback.
> 5. The order in which tapes are run is not clearly described. In fact,
> the relevant section is utterly incomprehensible. Surely *they* know
> what they meant - but *I* haven't got a clue!
>
Ask for clarification.
> 6. Similarly, there's a new form to fill out - but I don't understand
> why, what does on it, or when it's meant to be done.
>
Ask and you shall receive.
> 7. The procedure talks about "software backups". As most of you won't
> know, the regulations make a distinction between "backups" and "archive
> copies", and this document is confablating the two. The result is a most
> inappropriate procedure, which is outside the scope of the document anyway.
>
Point out the confusion and ask for clarification.
> 8. Did I mention yet that THIS PLAN IS CRAZY?!
>
Yes but you fail to explain why it is crazy.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |