Post reply

Double-Take

  • October 25, 2006 at 6:10 am

    #667820

    We already own this product and are starting to implement to get our disaster recovery site up-to-date. The reason we picked this product was to sync our SQL Servers AND other Windows based system files. One solution for the Windows platform. We have had one incident where it did corrupt the master .mdf but it appears that it was our problem not the products. We are still doing more testing with SQL Svr.

  • October 25, 2006 at 6:22 am

    #667825

    I either didn't get it, or simply deleted it as advertising.  I am very quick with the delete key because of the bulk of e-mail I get.

  • October 25, 2006 at 6:31 am

    #667830

    Steve, Double-Take porduct is an area of our operations I do not support.  I read the e-mail and passed on it.

     

  • October 25, 2006 at 6:51 am

    #667840

    Database mirroring is built in SQL 2005, and we're using it. I fail to see how a 3rd party product would be much better.

  • October 25, 2006 at 7:01 am

    #667845

    It can replicate ANY Windows file(s) outside of SQL Server. It is good for syncing non SQL Server files for disaster recovery. We have a few critical servers that requires alot of polling files to be kept and another app that constantly is updating files in a specific folder that is quite large. Double-Take keeps the backup server at our disaster recovery site up-to-date.

  • October 25, 2006 at 7:13 am

    #667846

    When you can't find out anything, especially pricing, without doing a personal data dump, I lose interest very quickly.

    I liked what little I saw, but when will vendors learn that a lot of us simply will not turn over multiple fields of contact info for the privledge of watching/reading an ad?

    Absolutely amazing to me.


    Student of SQL and Golf, Master of Neither

  • October 25, 2006 at 7:23 am

    #667850

    I didn't look at this specific one but it gets tiresome having to give up contact information to read a whitepaper (advertisement) and then having to talk to some sales person just to get pricing information. I've even given up the practice of signing up with throw away email addresses and fax phone numbers. The whitepapers are normally not even worth that much effort.

  • October 25, 2006 at 7:28 am

    #667852

    We already use double take to replicate other files we need replicated besides SQL files. Since we already use it, I had no interest in visiting thier site.

  • October 25, 2006 at 7:35 am

    #667853

    I got the advert but I just don't have a need for it right now. I have had good results with transactional replication even with slow links between the US, Europe, and Asia so I am not sure I would need something like this. However, if the need arose, I would certainly investigate the product (and the competition) so they did at least get a note in the back of my mind; that's got to be worth something.

    [font="Tahoma"]Bryant E. Byrd, BSSE MCDBA MCAD[/font]
    Business Intelligence Administrator
    MSBI Administration Blog

  • October 25, 2006 at 7:37 am

    #667854

    I'm just not going to give out information to get information that should be free. If you want me to look at something, give me the information to review it honestly. I won't give you my contact information unless & until I want you to have it.

  • October 25, 2006 at 7:55 am

    #667859

    Sorry, I did receive the email but discounted it as an advertisement and for IT support. I'm not on the network staff, so I have not had a need to research restoration products. It is good to keep up with this stuff and I want to support your revenues where I can. I know somebody has to be paying to keep this great source of information available to us all.

    Thanks for the great forum and information.

  • October 25, 2006 at 8:00 am

    #667864

    The email did not reach me.

  • October 25, 2006 at 8:01 am

    #667866

    We do use the Double Take product and limit its use b/c we have had issues with long range block level replication.  A usual installation consists of duplexed servers at both a primary and backup site and we use  double take between servers within each site.  It has not proven reliable enough for us between long distances i.e.  between primary and backup and would require a pricy connection to get the bandwidth between the two to even consider.

  • October 25, 2006 at 8:19 am

    #667872

    I make it a rule to NEVER EVER respond to unsolicited emails or phone calls. If someone calls me at home and it is not one of my friends, I just lay the phone down. I don't hang up, I don't say anything. I just lay the phone down and come back later to hang it up. I also try not to give out my email address willy-nilly. Consequently, I get almost zero spam emails.

    I allocate only a few minutes a day to browse through my Daily Update from yall and occasionally respond to a question. If I get any other email without your familiar banner at the top, I send it to the corn field.

    teague

     

     

  • October 25, 2006 at 8:26 am

    #667875

    We are current users of the software, so the white paper wasn't much of an interest for us.  It works well for the mirroring and have never has a problem with that feature, but we don't totally trust failover and the WAN mirroring is totally based upon the speed of your WAN which unfortunately ours needs help.  So the license price in the $2-3K range is a bit expensive especially when the SQL 2005 has the mirroring.  However, we are looking to replace it with Polyserve's solution and a SAN.  Basically, it is a good product for what it does but our needs are outgrowing it. 

    SJ

    Accepting all invites

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 53 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply