BandL Weblog

Our Hearts Go Out to the People of Japan; Our Thoughts Turn to Disaster Recovery

Tweet Share

With the aftereffects of Japan’s recent disaster in full force and events continuing to unfold day by day, the hearts of the B&L Associates team go out to the nation and the people affected by this overwhelming tragedy. The toll in terms of destruction, devastation and human life is virtually incomprehensible. Please join us by helping the Red Cross with their recovery efforts in Japan. 

Click on the Red Cross logo below or text REDCROSS to 90999 to donate $10.

At the same time, given the business we're in, we can’t help but turn our thoughts toward the technological impact this disaster will have on Japan's infrastructure. The sheer scope and magnitude of this and other disasters, like 9/11, the earthquake in Haiti, the floods in Australia and Hurricane Katrina in the U.S., highlight the extremes that businesses should consider in their disaster recovery planning.

But, especially considering the potential nuclear threat that has been part of the Japanese crisis, is there really any way to plan for a disaster so extreme? How many disaster recovery plans assume that recovery will take weeks, or even months or longer? How many plans consider that none of the company’s technology—from cell phones to servers—may be working for some time?

Clearly, you can’t plan and prepare for every permutation of every remotely possible disaster event—especially on a limited budget. The challenge for companies is to assess a wide range of potential events and to make sure your disaster recovery plan is as comprehensive as is possible and realistic for your business.

Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a true disaster to remind us that disaster recovery planning—and revisiting and testing that plan—is more than a theoretical exercise. It’s a real business need, and one that can determine whether your business will succeed, fail or even continue to exist after a disaster.

 

Know Before You Go (Down): Will You Be Able to Get Back Up?

Tweet Share

An InfoWorld webcast I saw recently that focused on “Tape’s Evolving Data Storage Role” presented a lot of valid points. The session’s overall premise is that as the volume of data continues to explode, and the length of data retention grows, so too does our need for innovative storage solutions that combine disk, tape and cloud. The speakers go on to extol the virtues of tape, particularly its efficiency as a long-term storage medium and its portability.

The session also poses a very valid and challenging question that many businesses are asking today:

Given that we’re retaining data on tape longer than ever before, will we be able to restore from these tapes in the face of a disaster?

My advice: Don’t wait until this question is no longer a hypothetical to answer it. You need to know whether your business will be able to restore from tape before you’re faced with the reality of doing so.

As the speakers in the webcast state, ensuring that you’ll be able to restore from long-held tapes is partly about the media. They correctly advise setting up test procedures and following manufacturer best practices to verify that your tapes will allow you to recover effectively from your data loss. At the same time, these experts also convey that it’s about more than making sure the media itself will work—you also need the software, processes and procedures working in a way that allows you to functionally restore to the point in time of failure. In other words, you need a comprehensive plan that looks at disaster recovery as a business process, not just a technical function.

I’d like to add another critical part of the answer to the question of “will we or won’t we be able to restore?”: having a tape management solution that stores, moves, tracks and protects the media in your enterprise. Such a solution can help you locate a tape immediately for disaster recovery. It can guard against storing outdated, incorrect or damaged media and prevent accidental or premature overwrites. In short, it can go a long way toward ensuring that your business will, indeed, be able to restore from your long-term media.

If your DR strategy doesn’t include an answer to this important question, it should. Working through what this question means for your business isn’t simple—but it’s much simpler than waiting until the moment of crisis to ensure that your business can answer “yes.”

What about your organization? Do you have a DR plan? What is some good advice you've received regarding creating a disaster recovery plan?

5 Reasons Why Google Uses Tape for Disaster Recovery

Tweet Share

 

Tape backup saved the day for Google earlier this month when a software glitch caused the loss of messages, chats and other data for some 40,000 Gmail users. Tape is an important part of Google’s data recovery mix. And, as far as their users are concerned, that’s a very good thing.

I blogged recently about Why the Google Incident Proves Relevance of Tape Storage. Now I’d like to take it a step further and look at the top five reasons why I think Google uses tape backup for disaster recovery. 

1. Embracing redundancy
   You don’t have to be Google to have an ever-growing storage need. Businesses of all sizes have data storage systems that are expanding in complexity. Protection and recovery require the right combination of tools and applications. To accomplish this, Google and many other businesses use real-time replication, backup tapes and media management software. The right combination means protection against file corruption, software update bugs (in the case of Google), and application and storage system failure.
   
   
2. Off site protection
   As Google’s Ben Treynor blogged in Gmail Back Soon for Everyone, their tapes are stored offline and independently from the system. And, as we happily saw with Google, if the system is corrupted, the backed up data isn’t affected. Not even by a system-wide bug.
   
   
3. Sequential data storage
   Tape drive backups are stored and can be accessed sequentially. Disk drives, by contrast, provide random access storage. I’m willing to bet the need to access email sequentially was no small factor in Google’s decision to go with tape.
   
   
4. Lifespan
   Tape can last up to 50 years. Even in the event of a natural disaster or a massive power grid outage, tape stands the best chance of recovery. Plus, relocating tapes at any time during their long lifespan is safer and easier than transporting hard drives.
   
   
5. Proven
   Google is one more (and very high profile) example of the benefits of tape in disaster recovery. Ken Hess put it well in his Data Center Knowledge article: “And, you can be sure that no data center manager responsible for providing backup and restore services to customers, would ever go out on an untested limb to replace tape.”

That’s because tape has proved itself once again—this time for one of the most trusted companies in the world.  

 

Turns Out, Tape Doesn't Suck.

Tweet Share

I recently came across a blog post exploring the merits of tape vs. disk data storage. The post referenced a rather bold marketing slogan launched in the mid-2000s by a data deduplication vendor trying to convert the technology world from tape to disk: “Tape Sucks, Move On.” I understand the provider was even handing out bumper stickers back then emblazoned with this slogan.

As I was reminded of this campaign, it really struck me how untrue this prediction that disk would reign supreme and tape would die out—which seemed so certain to many at the time—has proven to be, some 5+ years later. And here’s why.

 

#1: Tape doesn’t suck.
Obviously, as a provider of tape management solutions for many highly satisfied customers, we’re going to take this stance. But the data also speaks for itself. The advantages of tape, enumerated in detail by the post at Enterprise IT Planet, include cost-efficiency (especially over the long term), portability, longevity and ability to quickly store and restore large files. So, while tape isn’t the answer to every storage need, these attributes make tape well suited for many environments and uses—which brings me to the second part of that bold marketing statement…

#2: The world hasn’t “moved on.”
Tape remains a critical part of a well-planned storage solution for many organizations. In fact, when 40,000 Gmail users logged in recently to find their e-mail accounts empty thanks to a software bug that affected disk-stored data in multiple data centers, it was tape that saved the day at Google.

As this example shows, the tape vs. disk debate is no longer an “either/or” proposition. Tape has an important role as part of a tiered storage solution and works best in many environments and situations—for instance, for long-term records retention where the time required to access the data is not an issue. Tape can ease large-scale data movements in disaster recovery or data center moves. From an audit perspective, it securely and verifiably keeps your data accountable and under your sole control. So, the question is not about eliminating tape, but about understanding your storage needs and having a strategy that uses the right mix of approaches and media to meet your objectives.

While tape sales certainly have declined and disk usage has no doubt grown over these past 5+ years, tape shows no signs of disappearing. With this in mind, I propose a new slogan:

“Tape Has Its Strengths - Incorporate It Intelligently into Your Storage Strategy.”

That’s not quite as catchy as that old slogan (and may not fit on a bumper sticker), but it’s a much more accurate reflection today’s tape/disk reality.

Why the Google Incident Proves Relevance of Tape Storage

Tweet Share

When a software bug got into Gmail on Feb. 28 and threatened to seriously disable the accounts of tens of thousands of users, Google used tape backups to successfully restore all the affected data.

Some are heralding this as a triumph of digital storage. Huh? Things would have gone faster and smoother, they say, if Google had been working with digital storage media.

In fact, the Google save is proof positive that tape storage remains a vital part of the corporate landscape. Advocates of tape say that after years of dire predictions, this episode shows that their favored medium is in fact very much alive and well.

In a recent post on the company's blog, Google vice president of engineering and site reliability Ben Treynor assured some 40,000 affected Gmail users that their messages, chats and other data would survive, specifically because all that data had been stored on backup tapes.

It undoubtedly came as a surprise to many, to hear that the Search giant still relies on such an archaic means of preserving data. Good thing it does.

As Treynor noted, the situation was salvaged in part because tapes reside offline, safe from the digital vagaries that sparked the crisis.

Other recent news gives further evidence that tape may be a preferable means of storage. Take for example a recent survey of 471 IT professionals conducted by Venafi, in which 51 percent of respondents said their digital certificates may have been stolen or gone missing.

Fifty-four percent indicated they had experienced instances of lost or stolen encryption keys. That number is telling. “[I]t is widely accepted that lost encryption keys can provide malicious insiders access to valuable corporate information revealed on high–profile whistleblower sites, such as WikiLeaks,” Venafi said.

All the more reason why many companies continue to rely on tape storage as an efficient and secure means of safeguarding their data.

Of course, there is some irony here. Google ranks itself amidst the many companies urging corporations to take their business vitals onto the internet, touting its security and predictability. Yet when it comes to data protection, perhaps newer is not always better.

Many companies that rely on backup tapes to store important information also use media and tape management software, which enables them to locate these storage tapes quickly in the event of an IT-related incident.

What do you think? Does the Google incident show that tape does have a place in the data lifecycle?