Pattern C: Modern Workloads

Right-Sized Recovery for Every Workload in One Guided Demo

A compact executive walkthrough that proves protection should follow business priority — matching each application to the right recovery promise and vault type instead of one model for everything.

Click Demo Architecture Proof Artifacts References
2 vaultsRSV + Backup Vault
11Business services
3 tiersRecovery priority
30-50%Cost savings

What Pattern C Shows

Pattern C answers the portfolio sponsor question: when a business runs many applications, should they all get the same backup? It proves protection should follow business priority — Recovery Services Vault for traditional IaaS that needs deeper recovery history, and Backup Vault for cloud-native workloads that need fast, lean operational recovery — so resilience and cost stay balanced.

Start Demo Backup Hub

Application Recovery Click-through

Portfolio decision mode Recovery-tier decision story

App Priority

Rank each workload by revenue, customer impact, compliance, and tolerance for downtime.

Recovery Depth

Use longer retention and full recovery paths where business risk is higher.

Fast Operations

Use lighter operational recovery where speed and cloud-native fit matter most.

Value Balance

Compare cost, recovery speed, and business criticality before standardizing.

Portfolio question: which apps deserve the strongest recovery promise?

Start by ranking workloads by business impact. A payroll system, customer portal, and analytics feed should not all receive the same recovery treatment.

11Business services
3 tiersRecovery priority
30%Optimization room

Interactive architecture walkthrough

Step through workload classification, two-vault placement, monitoring, and validated recovery in a guided click-through.

Launch architecture demo

Proof for the Conversation

Portfolio Owner

Ranks applications by revenue, customer impact, and compliance so the strongest recovery promise lands where business risk is highest.

Recovery Fit

Matches each workload to the right vault: RSV depth for critical IaaS, Backup Vault speed for cloud-native operational recovery.

Cost Boundary

Avoids over-engineering by tuning retention and recovery depth per tier, freeing 30-50% of spend without weakening critical recovery.

Pattern C Artifacts

ArtifactUse It ForLink
Infrastructure GuideDeploy both vault types and the workload placement model.INFRASTRUCTURE_DEPLOYMENT_GUIDE.md
SpecReview vault selection, placement matrix, retention, and cleanup.SPEC.md
KQLShow coverage by vault, restore-time SLA, and storage redundancy.coverage-by-vault / restore-sla / redundancy
SourceOpen the implementation package in GitHub.GitHub source

Compact Technical Reference

Runbook
  1. Classify each workload by business impact and recovery priority tier.
  2. Choose the vault: RSV for critical IaaS depth, Backup Vault for cloud-native speed.
  3. Apply retention and recovery depth that match the tier.
  4. Validate a restore for one critical and one operational workload.
  5. Optimize cost and standardize the portfolio recovery model.
Deploy Command
cd azure-backup-demo-spec az login az account set --subscription "<subscription-name-or-id>" ./scripts/deploy.ps1 ` -Location canadacentral ` -EnvironmentName backup-modern ` -Owner <owner-name> ` -VaultStrategy mixed
Monitoring Query
AddonAzureBackupJobs | where TimeGenerated > ago(7d) | summarize Protected = dcount(BackupItemUniqueId), Jobs = count() by VaultName = ResourceId | order by Protected desc