Continuous Data Protection Boston MA

The more technologically advanced we become; the more difficult it becomes to manage the data that technology produces. As computers increase in speed and storage capacity, the amount of data increases along with it and companies are struggling to deal with all of that data. Simply saving a daily picture of the data is no longer sufficient. The limitations it places on restorative functionality are tremendous.

Continuous data protection is a new concept in data backup. Traditionally, computer data backup is done periodically, usually once per day, though it can be done as infrequently as once per month. These backups generally saved files as they existed at the time of the backup and any variations of the files made during the day, week or month, depending on the frequency of backup, were lost with this method.

Computer data protection is going through a bit of a revolution right now. In the past, disk protection involved a periodic backup, usually onto a disk or tape recording system. This method has served its purpose well, but for all its benefits, it was still missing something vital. Continuous data protection involves continually capturing all data, including the changes made throughout the day, week or month, and tagging the varying versions for specific point in time recall if needed. Though disk based data protection can offer faster backup and restore time, it does nothing to help recover the data from earlier versions of the files being saved. Continuous data protection offers nearly infinite recover points so that any change to a document or file can be recovered and there is no requirement for the user or administrator to predetermine the amount or frequency of the recovery period. Continuous data protection is just that: continuous. The save points permitted by the implementation of continuous data protection occur each time a change is made to the data.

There are three different types of continuous data protection: block based continuous data protection, application based continuous data protection and file based continuous data protection. Each method of continuous data protection has its benefits, depending upon the situation and the user's needs.

Continuous data protection differs from traditional data backup in that the user does not have to indicate or mark a source in time in which to restore to in order to retrieve data. In other words, in order to restore to a certain point in time, the user does not have to save or mark a point to return to it. This is done automatically anytime a change is made. There are some programs that have been using this method for a while within their program, but they have been limited. Photoshop, for example, has a History function that allows a user to go back through the recent history of a document that is being worked on. The catch is how far back the program saves actions is limited and has to be determined beforehand.

Though some solutions are represented as continuous data protection, in actuality they only allow restoration to a fixed point interval, one hour, for example. While this is certainly more often than once a day or once a week, it is done automatically, rather than manually by an administrator. Continuous data protection is different from traditional data backup such as RAID, replication or mirroring in that these approaches merely protect against a hardware failure in storage by protecting the most recent copy of the data. Continuous data protection protects against data corruption and viruses and allows you to previous versions of the data.

Older methods of data protection employed a snapshot of the data. The snapshot continuous data protection takes of the file can fall into two separate categories. The snapshot can be a full copy snapshot that replicates the data set in its entirety. Often implemented in a process called mirror splitting, a full copy snapshot of a single terabyte of data consumes an additional terabyte of disk space.

A differential snapshot manages deltas that have only occurred since the snapshot was last taken. This method uses less disk space but requires more processing overhead. There are a few different methods for employing a differential snapshot, including Copy on Write, Redirect on Write and Write Anywhere.

The difference between these types of snapshot methods is in the cost of storage and performance. In addition, since the full copy snapshot does not rely on the main data store, they are usually more resistant to certain forms of corruption.

Whether the risk to data is from malicious code, such as viruses and Trojans, natural disasters that cause damage to hardware or simple hardware failure, today's companies face much greater risks to their data than ever before. Not only is there more date to manage, but also much less time to perform lengthy routine system maintenance. Today’s data centers are also less tolerant than ever to system outages.

In only the first half of 2005, there were more than 10,800 viruses and worms. This was an increase of 48% over the 7,360 documented in the second half of 2004. The increase in threat as well as the increase in variants is significant. This increase represents a new and distinct threat to systems which must be protected. The trend has also shifted from mass mailings to malicious code that is specific, modular and easily customizable.

Continuous data protection becomes vital to today’s webmaster. With continuous data protection, a website remains protected because the site’s data is continuously saved. Should something happen to the site, the webmaster can return to a snapshot of the site and restore the site from that particular point. Since the pictures are fluid, any previous modifications will be saved when continuous data protection is implemented. A webmaster therefore does not need to worry about losing the most recent updates to their site in the event that something should happen to the website or any of its pages. What’s equally nice about continuous data protection is that if a webmaster should make changes to a site and they find themselves unhappy with the changes, it is easier to restore the page to its former status.