I can't even
-
@scottalanmiller
Analogy: I crash car into a tree, blame mechanic. -
@scottalanmiller All the time.
-
@scottalanmiller Wow
-
Talking to a customer who tells us that they have a two year old server "so it is time to replace it." Um, what? Who replaces two year old hardware.
Hardware...
Intel 4th Gen Desktop CPU
8GB RAM
Spinning Rust
Windows 10OMG, it's a decade old desktop that wasn't specc'd out to be anything like a server at all even ten years ago!
-
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
Talking to a customer who tells us that they have a two year old server "so it is time to replace it." Um, what? Who replaces two year old hardware.
Hardware...
Intel 4th Gen Desktop CPU
8GB RAM
Spinning Rust
Windows 10OMG, it's a decade old desktop that wasn't specc'd out to be anything like a server at all even ten years ago!
They are calling that a server? I can assume they are misusing the MS license then too.
-
@Obsolesce said in I can't even:
@scottalanmiller said in I can't even:
Talking to a customer who tells us that they have a two year old server "so it is time to replace it." Um, what? Who replaces two year old hardware.
Hardware...
Intel 4th Gen Desktop CPU
8GB RAM
Spinning Rust
Windows 10OMG, it's a decade old desktop that wasn't specc'd out to be anything like a server at all even ten years ago!
They are calling that a server? I can assume they are misusing the MS license then too.
It's in Africa, so licenses aren't considered legal. Not that Africa is a single place, but the treatment of copyright law is pretty standard.
-
Good backups are just wasted money and not actually important, right?
Veeam is being used for backup - awesome! Veeam is good stuff. Slight issue is that it is running on a VM, to backup VMs on the same host, itself included. Not ideal, but with a good configuration backup, it will work. If something happens to the VM, install Veeam on the replacement, restore from the latest config backup, make adjustments if necessary, and move on.
Except...
- This same VM also runs other services that aren't related to backup functions
- The backups are stored on the same physical host
- ...on the same internal host datastore
- ...on a secondary virtual disk
- ...attached to the same VM
At least there is a backup copy job to another storage target, right?
- Target is a cheap Synology DS620slim at another site
- Storage pool is 6 x 2TB RAID 5 with spinning rust
- Frequently takes 2+ days for job to succeed, but fails more frequently than it succeeds
- Job omits the largest VM (file server), probably because someone said "the other file servers at the other locations are enough for the backup because of the DFS configuration"
What was the point in spending the money on Veeam, only to configure things in a way that ensures that you don't have a solid backup if something happens to the host or the virtual disk storing the backups?!
-
@srsmith said in I can't even:
The backups are stored on the same physical host
To assist in these kinds of conversations with customers (or internal IT), I never allow people to call these backups. I say "whoa, there's no backup here, that's a file copy and nothing more, backups have a definition and this doesn't in any way meet it. We can't say we have a backup as at no point do we back anything up."
Not allowing people to say "backup" helps. As long as they are allowed to say the word, they will convince themselves and others that they are protected.
And trust me, when government agencies with backup requirements come to check, you don't want to have been using backup sloppily to mean something other than a true backup. I've had teams threatened with actual jail time for playing fast and loose with their use of the term when the SEC almost found out that they had intentionally avoided backups.
-
This thread, https://access.redhat.com/discussions/669573, likely requires a Red Hat account to view, but it wins the necro post award.
The last relevant comment was in October 2011. Here's the latest comment nearly 12 years later
-
@EddieJennings said in I can't even:
This thread, https://access.redhat.com/discussions/669573, likely requires a Red Hat account to view, but it wins the necro post award.
The last relevant comment was in October 2011. Here's the latest comment nearly 12 years later
You should log in and post this:
