Sorin Srbu wrote:
>
>> So you need to be able to walk the fine line
>> between these two.
>
> I'm trying. Something it just isn't enough. Although the boss has a soft spot
> for linux, as he also heads the CADD (Computer Aided Drug Design)-group.
>
>> To put it into perspective, ask the manager how much it would cost the
>> business if this data was unrecoverable? After that, if they still
>> don't want to spend a few hundred $$s on the insurance, get it in
>> writing that your manager understands the risk and print it out and
>> post it on your office wall.
>
> Rather confrontative isn't it? Me being a Swede, I try to avoid those
> situations if possible, and find a compromise instead that both parties can
> live with. 8-} Oh, and I'm a government employee, so the money I spend is
> tax-payers money. Got to be careful there.
Being careful with the money is the point. Someone has to understand the risks.
> You know how that saying goes? You can chose between good, fast and cheap. But
> you're only ever allowed to pick any two. For me that's IT in a nutshell. ;-)
The other question to ask is whether an offsite copy is needed. After a fire or
other site disaster some businesses might collect the insurance money and
disappear - others might want to be able to rebuild and continue. Government
operations would probably need to continue and need a plan for that.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
