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 possibly be argued that no application touches as numerous areas of an organization as Exchange. Through the delivery space to the executive boardroom, almost every job function has some level of dependency on e-mail. Hence, when the e-mail server is unavailable, the entire organization is affected.
* With regulations like Sarbanes-Oxley, along with those regarding economic and healthcare institutions, the retention of email server hosting has become an ethical responsibility of one’s career. Other laws, such as E-SIGN, bind electronic agreements with the same validity as written contracts.
* And finally, as the above two examples are “internal”, many companies rely on e-mail 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 many organizations.
Therefore, the relevant question becomes “How can I effectively and affordably protect Exchange?” Before considering solutions, one should understand the difficulties first around protecting Microsoft Exchange.
* Exchange data is held in numerous directories with excessively 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 usage and remain open by the application. Even in the event the files could be sporadically closed, the use that is 24X7 of requires them become available all the time.
* The above two facts combined need a “backup window” and specialized, and typically expensive, software (called backup agents) to look within the declare old-fashioned back-up.
* And to make matters more technical, the current versions of Microsoft Exchange (2000 and 2003) are dependent on Windows active directory. This necessitates other information that is external also be protected to be able to ensure the resilience of one’s email server hosting system.
Collectively, it’s safe to state that Microsoft Exchange is perhaps probably one of the most applications that are difficult back up. For that good explanation, many IT administrators have begun considering different choices for Microsoft Exchange security and accessibility.
From a “protection” perspective, tape back-up is thought. However, as you steps enough time and energy needed to backup windows and restore tapes, we are forced to concede that tape backup alone is insufficient–when you think about that tape back-up occurs only nightly, which could bring about up to an day that is entire of loss should a failure occur. In the case of email server hosting, much of that data loss is unrecoverable. And then, during times during the restoration and crisis, data recovery from tape is usually calculated in hours.
For many, it is assumed that the only real other available technology is synchronous mirrored storage hardware. 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. By providing a second storage solution and allowing the storage fabric to maintain synchronization, the data can be protected.
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 functionality that is same and not restrict ourselves by “agents for Exchange” or other application.
The negatives of synchronous storage space revolve mostly around price (like the cost of the 2 storage arrays) in addition to the material, controllers and synchronization software. You can add the expense of a “storage manager” or other individual with specialized storage abilities. And on top of this, for almost any degree of real distance, one must also include the price of bandwidth–which is considerable when pressing blocks around and being influenced by a acknowledgment that is fast to your nature of synchronous replication.