Requires Free Membership to View
When you register for SearchDataBackup.com, you’ll also receive targeted emails from my team of award-winning editorial writers. Because your job never seems to get any easier, it’s our goal to keep you up-to-date on the latest backup tips, trends and technologies that will help you get the job done.
Rich Castagna, Editorial Director
If you're talking about remote backup, then bit/byte level is the only way to go. (By that, I mean something that sends only the changed
bytes/bits across the network -- not just changed files.) There's simply too much that changes on a daily basis to back up across a remote link without doing some type of bit-level or byte-level backup. Given the tone of your question, I'm not sure if that's the answer you're looking for.
If you're talking locally, it's a trade-off. That is, bit-level adds a level of complexity that you need to consider when considering such solution. File-level is a lot easier to do if you've got all the bandwidth that you need. On the other hand, bit-level will reduce your storage costs. Like I said, it's a trade off.
As to articles, I would look at some of my earlier Storage magazine articles about disk-based backups.
Editor's note: Do you agree with this expert's response? If you have more to share, post it in one of our .bphAaR2qhqA^0@/searchstorage>discussion forums.
This was first published in November 2003
Join the conversationComment
Share
Comments
Results
Contribute to the conversation