![]() Imagine this scenario: you perform backups on two separate external disks, but of the same model and specs. This rule prevents the risk of data loss or corruption due to having your backup in the same storage type. memory cards, optical disks, magnetic tape), or the cloud. internal HDD or NAS), removable media (e.g. The 3-2-1 rule suggests that you keep copies of your data on at least two different types of storage like internal disks (e.g. Store these copies on two different storage media types. the third copy offsite to avoid data loss in case of site-level disaster.a second copy that should be accessible for a quick recovery.Given this, we need at least 3 copies of your data to provide the previously pointed requirements: Of course, we could solve this situation by using that single backup in the cloud, but this would result in not having one copy near our infrastructure for fast recovery. No matter how many copies we do, if they all are in the same physical location (or area), we will lose the data in case of a wide variety of incidents (e.g., fire, robbery, natural disaster). Unfortunately, your data gets lost if a fire occurs in the building.Īlthough these reasons support the idea of having at least two backups, there’s still one thing to assess. Let’s imagine the following scenario: your company has a server on-premise, and you perform backups regularly to it. However, there is one type of risk that we have to consider: events that occur on-premise. ![]() We mentioned that one of the copies should be accessible for quick retrieval. However, the risk is high for the backup being corrupted, meaning that if you need it, it won’t be there. Imagine a situation that directly affects your primary data and your company has only one backup you need to rely on that backup to recover all your data. ![]() The big question is, “Why isn’t just a backup enough?”įirst of all, availability.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |