|
Posted by David Portas on 10/13/05 00:16
> has made it known that HP
> recommends their system over Microsoft SQL sever's normal
> backup/restore system.
HP recommend their own products? You don't say!
I don't know this particular one but in my experience the main benefits of
third party storage/recovery management software are around simplifying the
implementation and management of your storage and backup policies. In an
environment where you have many and varied requirements for backup and
recovery that can certainly save a lot of effort. On the other hand if you
only have a few servers with one or two backup cycles you'll probably get on
just fine with SQL Server's own maintenance plans.
--
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--
"Le" <TheLeGames@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129146301.194513.64880@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>Better/safer how?
>
> It was not explained to me. Our It department has been pushing very
> hard to implement HP's Data Protector, and has made it known that HP
> recommends their system over Microsoft SQL sever's normal
> backup/restore system.
>
> Currently our SQL Server dumps/restore process works perfectly, so I am
> very perplexed by our IT department's push.
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|