Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by InclinedPlane 5124 days ago
There is a very important difference. Redundancy doesn't protect you against bad changes to your data, backups do. Backups should ideally be immutable, and append only. What happens when a disgruntled employee runs 'sudo rm -rf /'? With redundancy the effects of that decision are dutifully cloned on all media. With backups one has the ability to rollback to an older state.
1 comments

Backups are redundancy out of firing range of problems like, say, hard drive meltdown, operator error, etc.

I've had gruntled employees, occasionally myself, run some variant of 'rm -rf' unintentionally far more often than I've had to deal with the other sort.

If you feel my grandparent post was advocating against backups, I'd strongly suggest you re-parse it. It's distinguishing between varieties of redundancy.