In the first part of this series, we explored the growing importance of disaster recovery in today’s digital landscape and introduced a real-world case study where a client sought to transition their backup and recovery processes to AWS. We also identified six key factors that play a critical role in selecting the right backup and disaster recovery (DR) solution:
- Backup vs Disaster Recovery
- AWS-Native vs Third-Party Solutions
- Scheduling and Automation
- Physical vs Virtual Servers
- RPO/RTO Requirements
- On-Premises vs Cloud Restores
Each of these factors represents a unique challenge and opportunity, influencing the design, implementation, and success of the final solution.
In this post, we’ll delve into these considerations, unpacking their impact on the decision-making process and how they align with business objectives. Using the same case study as a guiding example, we’ll examine the trade-offs and practical approaches for addressing these factors effectively.
If you’re grappling with the complexities of disaster recovery or simply looking to refine your organization’s approach, this post will provide actionable insights to help you navigate these decisions with confidence. Let’s dive in!
Backup vs Disaster Recovery
Though used interchangeably, the terms ‘backup’ and ‘disaster recovery’ serve different purposes. Think of them as two sides of the same coin, working together to ensure your organization can bounce back from unexpected events.
Backup: Preserving Your Data
At its core, a backup is simply a copy of your data. The primary goal of backups is to protect against data loss – this can be due to accidental deletion, corruption, or hardware failure. The goal of backups is to ensure that your information is preserved and can be restored when needed.
Disaster Recovery (DR): Restoring Functionality
Disaster recovery focuses on the bigger picture. Its goal is to not only restore data but entire systems and applications so that business operations can resume as quickly as possible after a disruptive event. Backups are a core component of a Disaster Recovery plan. However, DR often also involves the steps, processes, and technologies needed to rebuild or switch over systems to an operational state.
Think of it this way: A backup is like a library archive. If a book is damaged or lost, it can be replaced from the copy in the archive. The DR on the other hand is like the blueprint for the library. It can be used to rebuild, restock, and get the library back to an operational state in case the library burns down.
Why it Matters
One of the most common challenges in designing a data protection solution is clarifying what the client needs. Often, organizations come with a vague idea of their requirements, asking for a “backup solution” when what they truly need is a comprehensive disaster recovery (DR) plan—or vice versa. This confusion is understandable, given how closely related the two concepts are, but failing to distinguish between them can lead to costly misalignments.
Overdesigning for Backups: If a client simply wants a basic backup solution for data preservation, implementing a full-scale DR strategy could be unnecessarily complex and expensive.
Underestimating Recovery Needs: Conversely, if a client needs a disaster recovery plan to ensure operational continuity, but only requests a backup solution, they may be left unprepared when disaster strikes, resulting in prolonged downtime and significant business losses.
As an architect, it’s your responsibility to dig deeper during initial discussions to understand the client’s true needs. This distinction directly impacts every other decision you make—from choosing the appropriate tools and technologies to designing workflows that meet the organization’s recovery objectives.
When we return to our case study, we will explore key questions that can help you, as an architect, determine whether the client needs a Backup solution, a Disaster Recovery solution, or both.
AWS-Native vs Third-Party Solutions
When considering backup and disaster recovery in AWS, you have two main avenues: utilizing services built directly into the AWS platform (AWS-native) or integrating solutions from external vendors (third-party). Both options bring unique capabilities to the table, and the best choice often depends on the specific requirements of the client’s use case.
AWS-Native Solutions
AWS offers a comprehensive suite of native tools designed to simplify backup and disaster recovery processes. These services are tightly integrated with the AWS ecosystem, making them an attractive option for organizations already operating within AWS.
For example, AWS Storage Gateway is an excellent choice for organizations looking to implement hybrid storage solutions. For instance, a client wanting to extend their on-premises backup strategy by storing offsite backups in AWS could use Storage Gateway to create a seamless connection between their local data center and AWS.
Third-Party Solutions
While AWS-native services cover many use cases, they may not fulfil every organization’s requirement. This is where third-party solutions step in, offering advanced capabilities and flexibility that go beyond what AWS-native tools can provide.
For example, Veeam Backup and Replication is a strong candidate for clients with comprehensive DR requirements, particularly those looking to restore their infrastructure on-premises. For instance, if a client’s priority is ensuring robust failover and failback capabilities, Veeam’s simplified processes for replicating, testing, and recovering workloads can make it a more efficient and reliable choice. It enables quick restoration of systems to their original state on-premises, a feature that is especially critical in environments where continuity and minimal downtime are paramount.
Why it Matters
When designing a backup or disaster recovery (DR) solution, limiting your analysis to just AWS-native or third-party tools can lead to suboptimal outcomes. Understanding the strengths and limitations of both options is critical to ensuring the solution aligns with the client’s needs.
Tailored Solutions for Unique Needs: While AWS-native tools are well-suited for seamless integration within the AWS ecosystem, they may not offer the flexibility or advanced capabilities that some scenarios demand. Third-party tools, on the other hand, often cater to specific use cases like hybrid environments or complex recovery requirements.
Avoiding Overengineering or Gaps in Functionality: Focusing solely on AWS-native solutions could result in missing out on features provided by third-party vendors that better address the client’s needs, such as specialized failover capabilities. Conversely, opting exclusively for third-party tools when an AWS-native solution suffices could introduce unnecessary complexity and cost.
Future-Proofing the Solution: Clients’ IT environments evolve over time. A solution that is too narrowly designed might not scale effectively. Knowing your options across both AWS-native and third-party tools allows you to build a more adaptable solution that grows with the client’s needs.
Clients rely on architects to present comprehensive and unbiased recommendations. Demonstrating knowledge of both AWS-native and third-party options positions you as a trusted advisor who can navigate the full landscape of possibilities. Understanding the trade-offs between both approaches ensures that decisions are made based on functionality, cost, and alignment with the client’s objectives—not personal biases or familiarity with one toolset.
When we return to our case study, we will examine potential AWS and non-AWS solutions that align with the client’s requirements, along with the strengths and weaknesses of each option.
In this installment, we explored two foundational factors in designing an effective backup or disaster recovery (DR) solution: understanding the critical differences between Backup and DR and evaluating AWS-native versus third-party solutions.
In the next installment of this series, we will continue exploring the remaining key factors, including RPO/RTO requirements, physical versus virtual servers, scheduling and automation, and the choice between on-premises and cloud restores. These considerations will further deepen our understanding of how to design tailored and effective solutions.
Stay tuned for part three, where we’ll delve into these critical aspects of Backup and DR solution design.
Top comments (0)