Failover: When one machine fails, another machine (usually in the same location) takes over and resumes service
Disaster recovery: When Godzilla destroys your data center, you do have alternative locations to keep providing your service and protocols/means for the other location to know how to keep delivering the service
Depending on the particular needs of each service, disaster recovery might just be a backup tape in a safe in a different location. In other words, it's just having a defined protocol to recover from disaster. Likewise, failover might just be having a spare backup machine which makes you go to the data center for it to take over the place of the failed one, that is, having a defined protocol about what to do in case of machine failure.
Summing up, failover answers the question 'what do I do in case a single machine fails?', disaster recovery answers 'what do I do in case a disaster happens (fire, floods, war, ISP goes bankrupt, whatever)?'
发布评论
评论（3）
由于灾难（如 9/11）可以完全摧毁数据中心，这是否意味着灾难恢复是为该数据中心重建所有内容的过程？
Since a disaster (like 9/11) can completely destroy a datacenter, does it mean that DR is the processes of rebuilding everything for that datacenter?
故障转移更多地与备份过程相关。
从最终客户的角度来看，两者之间的主要区别是停机时间。
另一个区别是故障转移或灾难恢复后可用的环境的性质。
Failover is more linked to backup procedure.
The main difference between the two, from the end client's point of view is the downtime.
The other difference is the nature of environments available after a failover or a DR.
故障转移：当一台机器发生故障时，另一台机器（通常在同一位置）接管并恢复服务
灾难恢复：当哥斯拉摧毁您的数据中心时，您确实有替代位置来继续为其他位置提供服务和协议/手段了解如何继续提供服务
根据每项服务的特定需求，灾难恢复可能只是不同位置保险箱中的备份磁带。 换句话说，它只是有一个定义的协议来从灾难中恢复。 同样，故障转移可能只是拥有一台备用的备份机器，让您前往数据中心，让它接管发生故障的机器的位置，也就是说，有一个定义的协议，规定在机器发生故障时该怎么做。
总而言之，故障转移回答了“如果单台机器出现故障我该怎么办？”的问题，灾难恢复回答了“如果发生灾难（火灾、洪水、战争、ISP 破产等）我该怎么办？”
高可用性部署架构
Failover: When one machine fails, another machine (usually in the same location) takes over and resumes service
Disaster recovery: When Godzilla destroys your data center, you do have alternative locations to keep providing your service and protocols/means for the other location to know how to keep delivering the service
Depending on the particular needs of each service, disaster recovery might just be a backup tape in a safe in a different location. In other words, it's just having a defined protocol to recover from disaster. Likewise, failover might just be having a spare backup machine which makes you go to the data center for it to take over the place of the failed one, that is, having a defined protocol about what to do in case of machine failure.
Summing up, failover answers the question 'what do I do in case a single machine fails?', disaster recovery answers 'what do I do in case a disaster happens (fire, floods, war, ISP goes bankrupt, whatever)?'
High Availability Deployment Architecture