Re: [fhctech] Mini-networking redux
- While your point is valid, our situation at work is hardly the kind of thing
that would happen to any FHC out there. We're having problems with AT&T
installing and configuring some additional high speed connections. It's part of
the project where AT&T is making some direct connections to one of our
facilities in Mexico and we are having to put in additional routers and
fiberoptic lines and new equiptment that we haven't dealt with before, etc,
etc. There are fingers pointing in about a zillion directions by the Mexican
government, AT&T Mexico, AT&T USA, Cisco, BellSouth, a couple of other
equipment manufacturers, our people at both ends of the line, and so on.
Now, if I had said that my internet connection at *home* was being
intermittent, then it would at least have some minor relevance to the
discussion at hand. But that's working just fine. And if it weren't, I could
always just switch over to NetZero or some other ISP until it was working
again. Not a big deal.
For a low budget operation (and all of our centers should be making every
effort to save funds wherever possible and practical), it might not make sense
to keep adding HD space as a backup for the internet/familysearch.org being
down. What are we up to now? 120GB for everything the church puts out? And that
figure will keep climbing, probably faster than the price of hard drives comes
down. Even at the best prices that kind of space is going to cost you at least
$250. Is it worth that much to know that if the internet connection is down
you'll be able to continue working with outdated data? Oh, it may or may not be
too terribly out of date, but it's still stale data to some extent. It's not
the "redundant copy" that you mention. It's a "recent copy", where the term
"recent" can actually go back months.
You're probably much more likely to have a hard drive failure than to not be
able to connect to the internet (especially if you've got an alternate ISP in
your plans) or for the familysearch site to go down. That means you're spending
big bucks to have something that is less reliable than the item it's supposed
to be backing up. Does that make sense?
Individual situations may vary, especially in some rural/remote areas where
there may only be one ISP or phone lines are unreliable. In these places it
might make sense to have all the data on hard drives even once we are able to
do it all online.
I'd really really really like to have SLC tell us whether or not they will want
us to access everything using the internet, and if so to tell us when we can
expect this to take place. I'd hate to go out and spend a lot of money on a
hard drive only to have the church come out a week later and tell us we don't
need it. I for one want to go along with the program. That's why I want to know
what the program is going to be.
--- Lee <prgraph@...> wrote:
> ************** Lee 5/5/01 ***************__________________________________________________
> There are several reasons for maintaining local copies of FHD data. These
> increased reliability - redundant copies insure data is available when the
> remote server is not accessable or down;
> ************* Marty 5/31/01 ***************
> > I'd check myself and quote it to you, but our internet
> > connection at work is intermittent at best right now. I'll be lucky if
> > gets out.
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/