To: Gus who wrote (3918 ) 8/24/2001 11:48:26 PM From: Sam Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 4808 Gus, Question from a dinosaur stuck with an early 90s VAX/tape mindset. Here is an excerpt from your example: <<When Eastman, the Kingsport, Tenn.-based chemical giant with operations in 72 locations around the globe, was running the mainframe software, it kept backup copies of all its data on tape. If trouble hit, the IT department in Kingsport would go into disaster-recovery mode. This involved switching operations to another location to ring up the entire system on different hardware. "It took about 72 hours to do this," says Charlie Oliver, director of global computing and telecommunications services. Eastman, which conducts a portion of sales and other business over the Internet, instead opted to move to a business continuance model. "We wanted simultaneous copies of our database in two locations along with a connection to our Fibre Channel," says Oliver. The result: Downtime has gone from days to minutes.>> OK, I grock the mirroring, and how this is superior--way superior--to tape for restores. And superior for retrieving copies of files from the recent past that may have been accidentally deleted. This is easy. BUT, surely these guys still need to ARCHIVE everything--they don't just write over their files every month, losing files and records. Surely this requires huge amounts of tape cartridges (there were still something like $80m of DLT cartridges sold last quarter), not to mention larger capacity and faster libraries. Is Eastman (and others) really doing without any tape backups at all? Or have they just been relegated to a different structural level? Thanks for whatever light you may shed on this. Sam