Azure Warm Backup Site
-
we'd never pay for it. The costs would likely be way to high. The reality is for us - as long as the internet itself is reachable - the rest can be lived without for a few days, even email can be lived without for a few days.
Our main app is vendor hosted - so, again, if we have internet access - we're mostly getting by. -
@Dashrender said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
How are you dealing with onsite servers versus offsite? A VPN? The network component can be a PITA to say the least.
How do you do the tests? Do you disable all the local servers, then boot up the cloud versions?
I've never actually been through that process - so I'm really asking.
this is really tough for SMBs. The failover mechanisms can be quite problematic to manage at the network level. Very doable, but a lot of work.
-
@IRJ said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
I was really hoping for more discussion on this. I'd like to hear all your thoughts and pros vs cons.
Pro... super flexible and scalable.
Con... even at really low costs it is very hard to compete with owning your own gear price wise.Like all cloud computing, if you don't leverage the elastic features of it, the cost premium for that potential feature makes it hard to justify.
-
For a typical SMB, the amount that they need to restore to get something back up and running isn't all that much. The cost of downtime is typically not that high, and there is a "colder" option of having local or local-ish backups that don't incur so much month cost, and can be restored to cloud without already being stored there.
Recovery is not as fast, but just as automatic.
-
Warm site is absolutely not anything any SMB I have ever dealt with would pay for. Nor be something I recommended.
They simply don't have the RPO/RTO needs for that.
-
As for this solution itself? I think the prices are too high and it would sitll be too much work to maintian on going.
It sounds the the Hyper-V model for replication.
Replication like this is really, really only for a small group of businesses.
We had talked about this the other day in the thread with the bank that paid the crypto.
This type of thing is only good for site loss recovery, because it is replication.
Very few businesses need that. I mean still thousands, maybe even tens of thousands, need it. But that is a tiny percentage of businesses.
-
@JaredBusch said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
This type of thing is only good for site loss recovery, because it is replication.
Very few businesses need that.Yeah, SMBs are specifically the category most likely to not need site risk mitigation. They need to not lose a server, and to not lose data. But when a site goes down, they are typically "down" until the site is restored and rarely does having a failover location do them much good. But the cost is often very high.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
@JaredBusch said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
This type of thing is only good for site loss recovery, because it is replication.
Very few businesses need that.Yeah, SMBs are specifically the category most likely to not need site risk mitigation. They need to not lose a server, and to not lose data. But when a site goes down, they are typically "down" until the site is restored and rarely does having a failover location do them much good. But the cost is often very high.
This is definitely true for us. We don't have a space to see patients, we're closed.
We can reschedule existing surgeries to the hospital - but that would only be under the most dire of situations.
-
@JaredBusch said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
As for this solution itself? I think the prices are too high and it would sitll be too much work to maintian on going.
It sounds the the Hyper-V model for replication.
Replication like this is really, really only for a small group of businesses.
We had talked about this the other day in the thread with the bank that paid the crypto.
This type of thing is only good for site loss recovery, because it is replication.
Very few businesses need that. I mean still thousands, maybe even tens of thousands, need it. But that is a tiny percentage of businesses.
The last two SMBs I worked for must be exceptions
One was financial and the other was medical.The financial business relied on doing loans which are obviously big money. Being down for an hour was not an option. We had about 125 servers on prem with some SaaS stuff as well.
The medical place did heart monitors and handled huge orders and couldn't afford down time either.
Both places had under 250 employees and had offside data centers.
-
@IRJ said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
Both places had under 250 employees and had offside data centers.
But had on prem for their primary workloads?
-
The problem that the typical SMBs face is that they have no failover for the people or site. If the site is down, IT is already off of the table.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
@IRJ said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
Both places had under 250 employees and had offside data centers.
But had on prem for their primary workloads?
Yeah - that seemed weird to me.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
@IRJ said in Azure Warm Backup Site:
Both places had under 250 employees and had offside data centers.
But had on prem for their primary workloads?
We had a very old core that only supported a few apps and none of them were SaaS at the time
