Sam's SAN Diary Week #33: Functional Testing And Remaining Work

The last part of our disaster-recovery project was the application testing. The replicated SQL databases needed some scripts run to update records in our document-management system so that the records could point to the files' new locations on the disaster-recovery servers. Also, those databases being replicated at the dump level (rather than at the transaction level) needed to be restored.

We also had to modify our login script to account for a new Home directory, which was set at both the Active Directory level and the login script. Testing that part of the login script that drops the production Home directory link and sets up the disaster-recovery Home directory link required us to ensure the communication link was down, as it would be in a real disaster.

Access to the disaster-recovery Citrix Metaframe XPE server had to be enabled though the Sungard firewall. All of the applications tested out just fine. Our SAN and disaster-recovery project concept is a success. The major technical challenges have been met and the concepts have been proved. The HP Proliant servers, Emulex HBAs, Brocade switches, CNT routers and the EMC Clariion have worked as promised. And the EMC professional services team has been outstanding. This first test represents reaching an important milestone; however, one is never truly done with a business-continuity project.

During these past 12 months, we have published more than 30 diary entries. Time has come to wrap up this "Weblog." First. let me tell you what we have been doing since March and what we have on our plate for the rest of the year. They fall into five main areas:

1. We have additional systems that we must migrate to the SAN, replicate data, install servers at the disaster-recovery site to present data, and add applications to the Citrix remote desktop. Some will be done with the storage-based replication Clariion solution, and others will likely be done with Windows Storage Server 2003 host-based replication of data on the MSA platform.

2. There are scenarios short of a full-scale disaster that we have identified but not planned for. These must be evaluated and discussed with management. An important part of technology disaster-recovery continuity is constantly reviewing business needs, evolving regulatory requirements and repeating tests.

3. There is related data-management work we still need to attend to. The new SAN architecture and replication site give us an excellent platform to improve our data-protection and backup strategies for situations short of disasters. That includes EMC's Snapshots, better use of the HP tape library we purchased, and possibly some disk-based backup (DtDtT) solutions, either locally or at the disaster-recovery site.

We may also take a close look at the eVault product, which will require its own storage. Eventually, we have to develop a full data life-cycle management strategy. Just because SAN technology makes it possible to keep loads of data does not mean that business needs call for its retention.

4. Exchange recovery is still not fully designed. Microsoft Consulting Services (Carl Solazzo and Jenn Goth) led us in an excellent two-day architecture discussion, with substantial EMC input on the first day as to the data component. The conclusion on both EMC's and Microsoft's part is that SRZ's needs (Exchange 2000 replication over IP) requires moving to the Windows 2003 and Exchange 2003 platform for Volume Shadow Services support, augmented with appropriate, updated EMC products.

Until those products are available, we will be exploring host-based replication for Exchange. This was a general strategy initially rejected (see discussion of DoubleTake in Week 2). However, we owe the firm a better Exchange solution now, so this is back on the table. Since the project began, EMC has purchased Legato, and it is providing the most favorable terms imaginable if we use its comparable product, RepliStor.

5. SunGard has been working with us to implement its monitoring services. That is taking longer than either of us wanted, in part because SunGard reorganized just as we were going live. I am optimistic that it will be a good partner, once we work through the remaining monitoring issues.

NEXT WEEK: The editors at VARBusiness have asked me to write one more column. Next week, I'll discuss my experience working with the vendors and what lessons this customer's experiences might provide for the solution-provider community.

Sam Blumenstyk is the technology operations manager at Schulte Roth and Zabel, a midsize Manhattan law firm. Each week, follow Blumenstyk along as he upgrades his company's storage infrastructure and builds a SAN.