And lo on Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:57 -0000, Jim Henderson  
<nos### [at] nospamcom> did spake, saying:

> 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] nospamcom> 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.

Might have been Arcserve, rings bells.

>>> 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.

They were lucky in that it had never happened, the only 'problem' they had  
was the rolling restore window. The users had got into the habit of  
renaming files etc. out to ensure they wouldn't get overwritten before the  
archived monthly tape (yes they did at least have one of those) the amount  
of old crap that just got left on the servers [shakes head].

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message