There are many reasons to protect Microsoft Exchange. In fact, one could probably devote an entire article to simply building the case for Exchange protection; but instead, let’s simply list a few “whys” and move on to “how”.
* It could be argued that no application details as numerous elements of an organization as Exchange. Through the shipping room to your administrator boardroom, almost every job function has some level of dependency on e-mail. Hence, when the e-mail server is unavailable, the organization that is entire affected.
* With laws like Sarbanes-Oxley, also those related to economic and healthcare institutions, the retention of email is becoming an ethical responsibility of one’s career. Other laws, such as E-SIGN, bind electronic agreements with the validity that is same written contracts.
* And finally, even though the above two examples are “internal”, most companies rely on email server hosting as part of doing business, externally today. From distributing information between time zones, to coordinating a lunch location, e-mail is now often the most critical business communication for most companies.
So, the relevant question becomes “How can I effectively and affordably protect Exchange?” Before considering solutions, one should first understand the difficulties around protecting Microsoft Exchange.
* Exchange data is held in numerous directories with acutely interdependent that is large. In even the most simple configurations, tens to hundreds of mailboxes can be stored in a”information that is single” file.
* Exchange data files are constantly in use and remain open by the application form. Even when the files might be sporadically closed, the 24X7 use of e-mail requires them to be accessible all of the time.
* The above two facts combined require a “backup window” and specialized, and typically expensive, software (called backup agents) to appear within the declare old-fashioned backup.
* And to make matters more complicated, the current versions of Microsoft Exchange (2000 and 2003) are dependent on Windows directory that is active. This necessitates other external information to also be protected in order to guarantee the resilience of the e-mail system.
Collectively, it really is safe to say that Microsoft Exchange is probably the most applications that are difficult back up. For that explanation, many IT administrators have started evaluating various choices for Microsoft Exchange security and access.
From a “protection” perspective, tape backup is thought. Nevertheless, as one steps enough time and energy needed to backup windows and restore tapes, we are forced to concede that tape back-up alone is insufficient–when you think about that tape backup occurs only nightly, that could result in up to an day that is entire of loss should a failure occur. In the full instance of e-mail, much of that information loss is unrecoverable. Then, during times during the restoration and crisis, recovery from tape is usually measured in hours.
For a few, the assumption is that the sole other available technology is synchronous storage hardware that is mirrored. Instead of attempting to “backup” or protect the Exchange data from an application perspective (which forces all of the complexities that were mentioned earlier), some IT administrators simply protect the storage. The data can be protected by providing a second storage solution and allowing the storage fabric to maintain synchronization.
The aspect that is positive of the storage (and not the application) is that the solution becomes application independent. By protecting the storage, we can protect every application with the same functionality, and never restrict ourselves by “agents for Exchange” or any other application.
The negatives of synchronous storage space revolve mostly around cost (such as the price of the two storage arrays) plus the material, controllers and synchronization pc software. Adding the expense of a “storage space manager” or other individual with specialized storage skills. As well as on top of this, for just about any level of real distance, one must also add the price of bandwidth–which is considerable when pushing blocks around and being dependent on a fast acknowledgment due to the nature of synchronous replication.
Therefore the most of us find ourselves stuck somewhere in between. We recognize that nightly tape back-up isn’t adequate for protecting one of our most significant applications, but we can not manage hardware that is synchronous. Perhaps this is why a continually growing number of companies are deploying replication software that is host-based.
* In contrast to tape back-up, which occurs only nightly, host-based replication software transmits changes to any or all the Exchange files in real time. The mark copy is always only seconds behind.
* It offers comparable advantageous assets to hardware that is synchronous that its application separate.
As it is a software-only solution, one might say that replication software “protects like synchronous disk, with costs comparable to or less than tape”. There is probably a little literary license on both edges of the phrase, you obtain the concept.