Multiple copies of database

Question

This will seem like a strange post, but I am looking for articles, documents, briefs, etc. on why you should not have multiple copies of a database on multiple servers. This database stores very sensitive data. The IS Dept. want to reduce this number for the sake of security, development, and efficiency. The department that owns this data disagrees and has always dictated what happens with this database. They think IS is trying to take over their system. We simple want to improve the setup and security of this system's database.

Currently, there are 10 copies of the database other than production. The production server has 3 copies (including production), staging server has 3 copies, development server has 3 copies, 1 copy on warehouse server, and 1 copy on warehouse development server. That is a total of 11 copies! ....and they can't explain why they need all of these.

As the company DBA this troubles me greatly. I am currently looking for articles, etc. to support my argument for reducing the number of copies of this databases. Any website, whitepages, etc. would be greatly appreciated. I want to show as many different sources as I can that support my argument.

No, I am not kidding....3 production databases on the same server. The users can only connect to one and then the backup of that one is restored to the others. For some reason this is how this department has always done it. As far as I can tell they want to be their own mini IS department. However, we are responsible if something goes to ____.

Answer 1

Seems to me too many copies. This is what I suggest:

Production Server - 1 copy of db

Standby Server - 1 copy of db ( log-shopping or mirroring)

Staging (QA) Server - 1 copy

Development Server - 1 copy (data obfuscated)

Tape backup of production db for 30 days

Offsite backup (tape/external disk/memory stick/CD/DVD) 12 weeks (Friday's) or as required by business

 

---

Kalman Toth, SQL Server & Business Intelligence Training; SQL 2008 GRAND SLAM

Answer 2

Verify why they have thos copies... I would also have one copy per database and the rest burn to DVD and keep in safety place, noone knowns when they ask you to provide thiose copies back :-)

---

Best Regards, Uri Dimant SQL Server MVP http://dimantdatabasesolutions.blogspot.com/ http://sqlblog.com/blogs/uri_dimant/

Answer 3

Even the vendor told this department that this environment is less than ideal and best practice is to remove the additional databases.  Unfortunately, this suggestion has been dismissed.

Answer 4

Do infuriatingly useless laws count?  If so, your database may fall under SOX compliance standards.  Less databases equate to less audits, less headaches, and less fines.

John

Answer 5

Agree with Uri Dimant. You need to find out why they need all those duplicate dbs. Then only you will be able to provide the correct solution.

May be you have to handle this differently. Instead of trying to prove them wrong with supporting documents try finding out why they need those dbs, get into some sort of high level discussion.

Answer 6

Hello, Erin.

Welcome to the wonderful world of office politics and power struggles ;-)

I would caution you to tread carefully here, even though I'm sure you're right in thinking the number of copies is excessive. IMO, you need to think about a way to get the discussion in front of somebody upstream in your company's hierarchy from the users manager and yourself. Butting heads with the users an demanding justification for all the copies is going to increase the acrimony factor, producing a lot of heat, but no light.

You mention that "they" want to be their own mini IS dept. and I'm sure they think you are trying to assume ownership of "their" data and how it is stores. Bothe sides are emotionally invested.

Try to find a way to escalate the issue to an impartial third party with the power to implement her decision.