Re: Do not need backups with Veritas Volume Replicator

An audit trail is for reversing operator error. If that error is not caught within one calendar quarter in a well managed system it will never be caught.

No one ever says "You know I remember accidentally deleting that record last year (unless it is January 2nd or 3rd.).

I understand and appreciate your point. But honestly when was the last time you went to your tape library, picked a random tape, and tested whether it could be restored? My problem with tape is that it often gives a false sense of security. Too often I have been in a situation where the tape was found ... and found to be worthless.

Daniel Morgan

Sean M wrote:

> damorgan wrote:
> >
> > Yep. As will a tape.
>
> Yes, but with tape you have the luxury of reverting to a backup *before*
> the corruption, assuming you keep multiple backups around.
>
> > I was however a bit hasty in only considering backups from the standpoint of
> > hardware failure. In the case of operator failure I prefer to use an audit trail
> > strategy ... which once again eliminates the need for tape while guaranteeing
> > the ability to reverse any and all transactions.
>
> Eliminates/guarantees? That's some audit trail! How far back does this
> trail go? Your audit trail is stored somewhere, yes? What happens when
> the audit trail becomes corrupt or lost? What happens when you need to
> patch or upgrade your database and the process goes awry? Seriously,
> I'm not trying to bait you here - I'd love to know more about this
> strategy.
>
> Regards,
> Sean
Received on Mon Mar 18 2002 - 10:14:15 CST