Wouldn't a replicated server replicate erroneous deletions/updates ????
"damorgan" <damorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message
news:3C926DB0.288B6561_at_exesolutions.com...
> I tend to agree with them. I'm not sure I see any real purpose served in
backing
> up a server that has replication either so long as the other machine is at
least
> 1,000 miles away from the primary.
>
> Id guess that 25% of the time I've been in an environment where someone
ran for
> a backup tape ... restoration failed so I have little faith in them. Which
of
> course doesn't stop people from filling warehouses with tape.
>
> Daniel Morgan
>
>
>
> BEDick wrote:
>
> > I had a discussion with a client the other day, and they said backups
were
> > NOT necessary because they were using Veritas Volume Replicator. I'm not
> > familiar with this Veritas product, so I found it difficult to debate
their
> > position. But that statement was hard to swallow.
> >
> > The only thing I can think of is that a backup would give them another
level
> > of protection against site failure. Can you give me some more points to
> > make?
> >
> > --
> > Later,
> > BEDick
>
Received on Fri Mar 15 2002 - 16:09:55 CST
