A large financial services company is preparing to test their disaster recovery plan for their primary transaction processing system. The CIO wants to validate the recovery site's capability without disrupting normal business operations. Which testing approach would best meet these requirements?
Parallel testing is the correct approach for this scenario. In parallel testing, the disaster recovery (DR) systems are activated at the alternate site while the primary systems continue to operate normally. This allows an organization to verify that the recovery site can handle the required processing load and function correctly without disrupting normal business operations.
Interruption testing would cause a disruption to normal business operations, as it involves shutting down the primary site and shifting operations to the recovery site. Read-through/tabletop exercises don't actually involve activating systems and therefore cannot validate processing capability. Simulation testing involves creating a simulated disaster environment but typically doesn't involve processing actual production workloads, which is necessary to validate the recovery site's capability to handle the company's transaction processing system.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is parallel testing in disaster recovery?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the key differences between parallel testing and interruption testing?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are tabletop exercises and their role in disaster recovery planning?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
ISC2 CISSP
Security Operations
Your Score:
Report Issue
Bash, the Crucial Exams Chat Bot
AI Bot
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
IT & Cybersecurity Package Join Premium for Full Access