So time, bandwidth, man-power, and growth have brought me full circle to this question again. We're looking to consider a greenfield approach to totally revamp our backup infrastructure. Multiple offices, inter-connected through an MPLS or SSL-VPN, each with their own local storage for on-site file restores, with nightly replication between offices for our critical systems. We're looking to add iLand as our cloud backup and use that for our official DR and retention, which has me looking to determine how much space we're going to need in our contract.
The goal is to approach our backups as if we were taking over for the first time, considering what we would want to do in an ideal situation. The understanding that the company is expecting to double in size within five years; so the consideration for scaling up as the company does is a major consideration as we go forward. Consideration is being taken for the types of files, their cycle of change and use on a daily/weekly basis, how they measure up on an internal mission-critical scale, separation of data types among the disks on the servers, and then how we want to consider our retention policy going forward. We have certain requirements for file retention within the live system for the industry, but the length of backup retention is not clearly defined, nor dictated.
Here are my questions that I'm considering;
- If we have servers configured that only have one disk and store multiple types of data, wouldn't it be prudent to consider re-designing those servers to properly segment the data to avoid a scope creep when creating our backup planning and structure?
- Do I get better use of my storage space by using multiple "end-of-day" retention points in my regular jobs, as opposed to using the GFS retention points and weekly archive points within a backup copy job structure?
- Am I the only one that feels when considering the infrastructure, and looking to alter what's already in place to a clean, new solution, that it feels like I wind up going in circles, with so many different points of data to review, that one solution and idea, completely counteracts the one I developed and the progress I had already made?
- Is there any logical reason to use my cloud storage for the smaller data size, just as a cost consideration, and my local storage for a split environment, just because it could possible better return on investment in the immediate future, but be negligible, if not reverse, as the enterprise continues to grow?
Thanks for any, and all, suggestions, comments, and any kind of insight that's offered.