On 10-Jan-2014 07:41 -0800, rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
<<SNIP>> heard that it's not the concern it used to be.
Probably depends on the goals trying to be achieved.? Some scenarios
may derive great benefit from secondary ASPs; both for journaled changes
and\or effectively hierarchical storage.?
<<SNIP>> actually restored journals from a secondary ASP and
applied them to an earlier backup as part of an actual DR caused
by catastrophic disk failure of ASP 1? <<SNIP>>
But the _journals_ were restored as part of the recovery of ASP-1.
The _journal receivers_ on ASP-2 were just sitting there, waiting to be
used for the apply process; i.e. no restore required.? Had the
receivers all been on ASP-1 with the journals, then all those receivers
had to be saved and restored in the same DR as part of the recovery of
ASP-1, after which the apply process can begin.