Read Only Repositories...



We are looking for an offsite cloud solution to duplicate data backed up through Rapid Recovery on our local NAS.  Seems replication with a cloud VM is the way to go but costs could be significant. If we went with Amazon S3 for read-only archiving, can we still recover data from these archives?  

I guess what I'm really asking is  what is the main reason to go with a cloud VM for replication verses just archiving the data if it can still be recovered?  Is it just the retention policy? 

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

No Data
  • With Rapid Recovery 6.0 and newer you can attach an archive directly to a core server and then restore data from the archive. You can attach an archive stored in the cloud, on network storage, or on local disk. The ability to attach directly to a cloud archive is very powerful and makes archiving a viable replacement for offsite replication.

    The key reason to go with replication over archiving is the retention policy. With replication you can specify how many recovery points to keep and how long you want to keep them. Scheduled incremental archiving simply appends new data to the archive forever and does not remove any old data. So with replication you can have a fixed amount of data that is cycled through. With archiving you'll build up data and increase your usage with each incremental archive. The only way to purge data from the archive is to delete the entire archive and then create a new one.

    From a cost perspective, archiving is probably going to be cheaper in the long run even with the data growth if you are using slower tiers of storage in the cloud (Azure cool storage, Amazon Glacier, etc.). In the next release of Rapid Recovery there will be direct integration with Amazon Glacier so it might be worth waiting for it to release before you set up your offsite archiving. We don't give ETAs but we're hoping it will release sometime in April 2018.
No Data