Making Light :: :: comments

Preditors & Editors Hacked

I was wondering why, earlier today, I couldn't reach P&E and had to use a Google cached copy of their...

-- comment #1 from Claude Muncey

Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:52:13 -0500

[Insert standard statement about backups and disaster planning here]

]]>

Posted April 5, 2007 11:52 PM by Claude Muncey

-- comment #2 from Serge

Fri, 06 Apr 2007 00:09:41 -0500

Disaster planning, Claude? That sounds so negative. Where I work, we call them Business Continuation Plans.

]]>

Posted April 6, 2007 12:09 AM by Serge

-- comment #3 from j m mcd

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 14:25:03 -0500

at the risk of sounding like an evil bstrd, does anyone know if the shady "publishing" companies dave fights are as meticulous about business continuation plans?

i'm not suggesting anyone do anything, i'm just saying... you know. are they?

]]>

Posted April 7, 2007 2:25 PM by j m mcd

-- comment #4 from Xopher

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 16:10:03 -0500

At my company we have a whole department called DRM - Disaster Recovery Management. Whether it existed before we lost many of our servers on 9/11 I'm not sure.

]]>

Posted April 7, 2007 4:10 PM by Xopher

-- comment #5 from Serge

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 16:32:07 -0500

Xopher... I think they started worrying more about those situations after 9/11, but the trend started in the mid-1990s. By the way, if you want a really sad and ridiculous side-effect of 9/11, go to DisneyLand. Remember the long waiting lines at Space Mountain? Now, the long waiting lines are outside. I kept wondering why, last year, during LAcon, and it occurred to me that maybe they're afraid terrorists will target the Indiana Jones ride and the best way to protect us is to keep us outside, where the sun can cook us instead.

]]>

Posted April 7, 2007 4:32 PM by Serge

-- comment #6 from Dave Kuzminski

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 19:50:53 -0500

j m mcd, I doubt if they're as well prepared. Not only are there two P&E sites operating simultaneously, there's a third hidden site that can be activated when necessary. I also keep four backup copies.

Then again, I've been in programming for over 25 years, so I'm used to keeping backups. For the programming I do at work, I have as many as twenty backups to show how the program evolved so that a wrong turn in direction can be recovered from quickly and easily.

]]>

Posted April 7, 2007 7:50 PM by Dave Kuzminski

-- comment #7 from Aconite

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 19:59:51 -0500

Dave Kuzminski @ 6: It warms my heart to hear about those lovely, lovely redundancies. That's a thing of beauty, that is.

]]>

Posted April 7, 2007 7:59 PM by Aconite

-- comment #8 from Bruce Cohen (SpeakerToManagers)

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 20:08:14 -0500

Dave Kuzminski @ 6

I have as many as twenty backups to show how the program evolved

Is that in addition to or instead of a version control system? If it's instead, why not use one?

]]>

Posted April 7, 2007 8:08 PM by Bruce Cohen (SpeakerToManagers)

-- comment #9 from Dave Kuzminski

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 23:22:19 -0500

I'm essentially a one-programmer shop in the office I work at. I'm responsible for my backups, so it's essentially my version control system. As for the backups of the actual program, it uses rotating copies. That's only to protect the data since only one or two backups are needed of the actual program.

]]>

Posted April 7, 2007 11:22 PM by Dave Kuzminski