Within the database infrastructures of large-scale enterprises and government organizations, preserving swift and dependable disaster recovery processes continues to be particularly challenging with increasing data volumes and greater complexity in systems. This study conducts an evaluative analysis of advanced failover and backup methods, comparing traditional cold standby models to multi-region, transaction-aware replication architectures. Controlled fault injection across OLTP and OLAP systems yielded results showing 64% reduction in average Recovery Time Objective (RTO) from 430 seconds to 155 seconds. Under write-heavy workloads, RPO drift was improved by over 70%; decreasing from 8.1 seconds in legacy systems to 2.3 seconds in the systems with adaptive replicas. There was also an improvement of 19% in the success rate of transaction rollbacks, whereas predictive failure detection reached 91% accuracy in forecasting excessive write queue formation. Additionally, the study demonstrates a reduction in cost-efficiency of modern architecture, showcasing a 47% decline in recovery cost per gigabyte of restored data. These results purposefully outline the significant operational and technical benefits accompanying the implementation of software-defined disaster recovery techniques within high-availability environments.
Gray J, Shenoy P. Rules of thumb in data engineering. InProceedings of 16th international conference on data engineering (Cat. No. 00CB37073) 2000 Feb 29 (pp. 3-10).
2.
Tellez Salinas C. Ransomware in the EU: Assessment of the Threat Landscape and Cybersecurity Governance. 2024.
3.
Zamanian E, Yu X, Stonebraker M, Kraska T. Rethinking database high availability with RDMA networks. 2021.
4.
Kambatla K, Kollias G, Kumar V, Grama A. Trends in big data analytics. Journal of parallel and distributed computing. 2014 Jul 1;74(7):2561-73.
5.
Gutta LM. A Systematic Review of Cloud Architectural Approaches for Optimizing Total Cost of Ownership and Resource Utilization While Enabling High Service Availability and Rapid Elasticity. International Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation. 2024 Mar;16(1):1-20.
6.
Ford D, Labelle F, Popovici FI, Stokely M, Truong VA, Barroso L, Grimes C, Quinlan S. Availability in globally distributed storage systems. In9th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 10) 2010.
7.
Xing L. Cascading failures in Internet of Things: Review and perspectives on reliability and resilience. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2020 Aug 24;8(1):44-64.
8.
Asghar T, Rasool S, Iqbal M, ul Qayyum Z, Mian AN, Ubakanma G. Feasibility of serverless cloud services for disaster management information systems. In2018 IEEE 20th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications; IEEE 16th International Conference on Smart City; IEEE 4th International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS) 2018 Jun 28 (pp. 1054- 1057). IEEE.
9.
Islam MA, Vrbsky SV. Transaction management with tree-based consistency in cloud databases. International Journal of Cloud Computing. 2017;6(1):58-78.
10.
Pearson S, Benameur A. Privacy, security and trust issues arising from cloud computing. In2010 IEEE Second International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science 2010 Nov 30 (pp. 693-702). IEEE.
11.
Brewer E. CAP twelve years later: How the" rules" have changed. Computer. 2012 Jan 17;45(2):23-9.
12.
Lamport L. The part-time parliament. InConcurrency: the works of Leslie Lamport 2019 Oct 4 (pp. 277- 317).
13.
Kossmann D, Kraska T, Loesing S. An evaluation of alternative architectures for transaction processing in the cloud. InProceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data 2010 Jun 6 (pp. 579-590.
14.
Mohan C, Haderle D, Lindsay B, Pirahesh H, Schwarz P. ARIES: A transaction recovery method supporting fine-granularity locking and partial rollbacks using write-ahead logging. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS). 1992 Mar 1;17(1):94-162.
15.
Abualkishik AZ, Alwan AA, Gulzar Y. Disaster recovery in cloud computing systems: An overview. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications. 2020;11(9).
16.
Bernstein, David. “Containers and cloud: From lxc to docker to kubernetes.” IEEE cloud computing 1.3 (2014): 81-84.
17.
Schwartz PM, Solove DJ. The PII problem: Privacy and a new concept of personally identifiable information. NYUL rev. 2011; 86:1814.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
