[FX.php List] Do RackSpace "Snapshots" conform to Best Practices?

[Chris Hansen]

Jonathan,

I'm with you here.  While I've been working with AWS recently rather than RackSpace, I don't know that the environment is important.  Rather, my question is: why would you want to risk your data at all, especially when the "cost" is so low?  You turn off FM Server, upgrade the instance, then turn it back on; total time is only minutes if things go as planned.  And if things DON'T go as planned, well, you'll be glad that FileMaker was shut down properly.  I'd even be tempted to do an extra backup, just in case.  Is there some reason for the angst about turning off the database server briefly?

Best,

--Chris

On Mar 9, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Jonathan Schwartz wrote:

> Hi Folks,
> 
> I need a quick weigh-in from FileMaker experts on the list.
> 
> One of my clients has moved FileMaker Web Publishing to third party 
> RackSpace, which uses virtual servers under Windows.
> 
> After a week of trying to run FMS on only 2gb ram, they have agreed 
> to upgrade the instance to 4gb.  The upgrade process consists of an 
> automated system that takes a "snapshot" of the server and then 
> rewrites the "snapshot" once the memory has been upgraded.
> 
> I contend that taking the "snapshot" is the same as copying live 
> FIleMaker Server files, and in violation of FileMaker Server Best 
> Practices.  I am urging them to shut down FileMaker Server and do the 
> upgrade with it shut down.  Others are saying the the "snapshot" 
> approach is OK.
> 
> Does anyone have experience with snapshots or RackSpace or both?
> 
> Need a quick answer, as I am standing on the tracks refusing to 
> budge....for the good of the data. ;-)
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jonathan Schwartz
> Exit 445 Group
> jonathan at exit445.com
> http://www.exit445.com
> 415-370-5011
> _______________________________________________
> FX.php_List mailing list
> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>