Conventional wisdom might say that if one data backup, replication, archival, and recovery provider is good, then more is better. Why not have a backup for a backup, in case the first experiences a disruption or goes out of business? Yet, according to new data from EMC, when it comes to data protection vendors, one is great, two is okay, and three or more is worse than nothing.
According to EMC's global report, an integrated data protection program from one vendor significantly reduces the cost of unscheduled downtime and the amount of data lost (in breaches or other incidents). Yet, organizations that employ three or more vendors actually lose more data and more money. From the report:
|Disruption impact, by number of data protection vendors|
|# of vendors||Data Loss, in Terabytes||Cost of Downtime|
Worldwide, 49% of companies experienced unscheduled downtime, 32% experienced data loss, and 17% got hit with both, according to the report. Some 23% of the affected organizations said that a security breach was one of the causes of such disruptions. Worldwide, unintended downtime cost companies $954 billion, and data loss cost $754 billion -- that's $1.7 trillion in all, roughly equal to half the GDP of Germany.
EMC also found that while the number of data loss incidents worldwide decreased, the amount of records lost yearly has quadrupled since 2012.
Of 24 countries, EMC ranked China number one in data protection "maturity," with 30% of organizations being considered "ahead of the curve." The US was ranked fifth overall, with 20%.
See the full report at http://www.emc.com/microsites/emc-global-data-protection-index/index.htm.