Turning to virtualization as a solution for solving underlying disaster recovery (DR) problems may not be the right move, according to analyst Jon Toigo, who is critical of the marketing surrounding the technology.
"[It is a lie] that virtualization will rectify infrastructure problems. It certainly will not," Toigo told his TechTarget audience. "It does, in the best possible of circumstances, afford a greater economy of the use of hardware."
Toigo went on to caution against the idea that virtualization enables "continuous business operation" and eliminates the need for business continuity and DR planning.
"Business continuity and disaster recovery planning is a counter-intuitive argument to make to the organization. We're asking companies to spend money that's in short supply on a capability that -- in the best possible circumstances -- never needs to be used," he said.
Plus, defining a disaster is really determined on a case-by-case basis for each organization. "There are no actuarial tables for disaster. There's not even a common definition of what comprises a disaster, because disasters are relative and contextual. A disaster that interrupts the processing of data at the beginning of the month maybe a mere inconvenience, but at month's end, when you're running a report, it may be a disaster," Toigo said.
Toigo said getting management engaged on funding business continuity and DR is "already a Herculean task," and virtualization vendor claims that "traditional DR is dead" doesn't make it any easier.