<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: One Mans Backup Strategy</title> <atom:link href="http://www.mswhs.com/2008/09/one-mans-backup-strategy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.mswhs.com/2008/09/one-mans-backup-strategy/</link> <description></description> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 02:23:14 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item><title>By: Bogdan S.</title><link>http://www.mswhs.com/2008/09/one-mans-backup-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-10375</link> <dc:creator>Bogdan S.</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 05:55:54 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://mswhs.wordpress.com/2008/09/22/one-mans-backup-strategy/#comment-10375</guid> <description>I don&#039;t believe it is. I still think that one cannot totally rely on WHS for the backup.  Why?  How does one recover from a customer database backup corruption / disk failure?  Currently, this is one of the major exposure of WHS. Secondly, lack of daily backups (versioning) of the WHS shares themselves is also great backup security hole. The idea of attaching and detaching an external USB disk just to do the backup is  .... unrealistic, but corruption / deletion of a file from a WHS share very likely.  RAID-5 is just some extra level of hardware based protection, that cost extra money. If one can afford it, why not do it?
If I am wrong any any of my thinking please do let me know.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t believe it is. I still think that one cannot totally rely on WHS for the backup.  Why?  How does one recover from a customer database backup corruption / disk failure?  Currently, this is one of the major exposure of WHS. Secondly, lack of daily backups (versioning) of the WHS shares themselves is also great backup security hole. The idea of attaching and detaching an external USB disk just to do the backup is  &#8230;. unrealistic, but corruption / deletion of a file from a WHS share very likely.  RAID-5 is just some extra level of hardware based protection, that cost extra money. If one can afford it, why not do it?<br
/> If I am wrong any any of my thinking please do let me know.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Brian</title><link>http://www.mswhs.com/2008/09/one-mans-backup-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-10374</link> <dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:42:40 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://mswhs.wordpress.com/2008/09/22/one-mans-backup-strategy/#comment-10374</guid> <description>How many of those backups are stored offsite?  All the redundancy in the world won&#039;t help if your house burns down.I will say though that his backup solution seems a bit paranoid and yeah, it is overkill.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How many of those backups are stored offsite?  All the redundancy in the world won&#8217;t help if your house burns down.</p><p>I will say though that his backup solution seems a bit paranoid and yeah, it is overkill.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 29/32 queries in 0.008 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 369/369 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: CloudFront: cdn4.mswhs.com

Served from: www.mswhs.com @ 2012-05-25 00:20:18 -->
