[SATLUG] Fwd: Looking for backup solutions

Richard Suberg rsuberg at satx.rr.com
Fri Apr 22 11:13:22 CDT 2011

Hash: SHA256
I was thinking of clustering SQL servers, but the second would have to
be a virtual somewhere, and I don't know how well the software would
like it. Its key is generated off of the name of the computer and the
hardware it is installed on. Talk about anti-piracy!


On 4/21/2011 4:29 PM, Kevin Flanagan wrote:
> Howdy!
> I think David is heading in the right direction. You might want
> to look into a standby database, we do that for DR. Basicly the db
> will create archive logs that are then pushed to the DR db server.
> Then MSSQL on the other server will take those archive logs and
> apply them to the standby db. If you have a failure you just make
> the standby "active" and point your apps to that server and db. I
> did a quick google and found these, not sure what the pricing is
> but might be what you are looking for.
> http://www.ibackup.com/online-backup-sql-server/
> http://mylittlebackup.com/mlb/spotlight/online_sqlserver_backup_restore_myli
> http://www.backup4less.com/overview.cfm
> -----Original Message----- From: satlug-bounces at satlug.org
> [mailto:satlug-bounces at satlug.org] On Behalf Of David Kowis Sent:
> Thursday, April 21, 2011 1:22 PM To: satlug at satlug.org Subject: Re:
> [SATLUG] Fwd: Looking for backup solutions
> On 04/21/2011 01:08 PM, Richard Suberg wrote:
>> It's not that I am against onsite backups, that is what we are
>> doing now. I want to find something more effecient for the amount
>> and type of data I am backing up. Our data changes so much in 30
>> minutes, it would be a significant account impact, along with the
>> service. We could probably recover from a 30 min data loss, but I
>> can't picuture still breathing after an entire day gets lost.
>> Everyone would be coming after me (including management) to find
>> out what happened to all the sales orders, service orders,
>> invoices, and everything else. Currently, the MS backup is doing
>> the exchange at the same time as
> the
>> rest of the backup, (at 9:00 at night) and I do backup from one
> server
>> to another some extremely critical stuff (sql, exchange, system
> state)
>> to a Ubuntu box, but that still only runs nightly. I would like
>> to find a backup solution that doesn't tax the processor much
>> more than it already is. (Sorry Tom, but the hard drive light is
>> on as much as the power light now with the jungledisk running.)
> Are you looking for redundancy or backups? Backups would protect
> you from someone accidentally deleting things. Redundancy would
> protect you if your hardware dies. Nightly backups are probably
> okay. Redundancy sounds more like what you want here, IMHO.
> If the stuff is in the database, it sounds like you need a slave
> database set up, so you have a database set up in case the first
> one fails. If you're doing all this with files, you might want to
> use a fancy filesystem that does snapshots or something, maybe some
> kind of distributed filesystem with Copy on Write or something. I'm
> not completely certain what would do well. Something that could do
> snapshots without consuming ridiculous amounts of space. I know ZFS
> can do it, but that's not linuxy.
> David
- --
SATLUG mailing list
SATLUG at satlug.org
http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to manage/unsubscribe
Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)

- -- 
Thunderbird Portable...it goes with me!
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

More information about the SATLUG mailing list