Multi-Region Disaster Recovery Platform
Disaster recovery engineering project with RTO/RPO targets, active-passive architecture, failover runbook, recovery workflow and validation evidence.
Project Overview
This project treats disaster recovery as an operating system, not a diagram: recovery objectives, region responsibilities, failover decisions, verification steps, rollback thinking and cost boundaries are documented together.
Engineering Problem
The engineering problem is turning failure into a controlled process. A recovery plan must explain who decides, what moves, how success is verified and what tradeoffs are accepted.
- Define how service continuity is handled when a region, dependency or routing path fails.
- Translate RTO/RPO targets into architecture choices that can be tested, explained and challenged.
- Document failover behavior without overstating permanent production infrastructure.
Architecture
The architecture is written around failure states: normal operation, degradation, failover, verification, rollback and post-incident evidence.
- Primary and secondary region responsibilities are described with clear recovery assumptions.
- Traffic, state, dependency and decision points are separated so each recovery risk can be reviewed.
- Runbook steps connect detection, decision, failover, verification and rollback.
- Evidence files show how the design would be validated under controlled conditions.
Implementation Evidence
Implementation evidence follows the recovery lifecycle from primary failure detection through decision, failover, verification and review.
- Recovery objectives and operational assumptions are written as reviewable engineering constraints.
- Runbook structure shows ownership of incident flow, not only infrastructure provisioning.
- Validation notes explain how failover behavior is checked without unnecessary spend.
- Repository evidence connects architecture, procedure and operating tradeoffs.
Validation Evidence
Validation is captured in the repository so the project can be reviewed without relying on vague claims. Continuous checks cover Terraform and verify that the recovery runbook contains RTO, RPO and rollback controls.
- Checks focus on documentation completeness, recovery-flow consistency and evidence traceability.
- The project separates validated design evidence from always-on cloud claims.
- Source history keeps the disaster recovery design auditable.
Operating Tradeoffs
The project keeps spend controlled while showing how reliability decisions are made, validated and explained.
- The project avoids idle duplicate environments while documenting realistic recovery behavior.
- RTO/RPO framing makes tradeoffs explicit instead of hiding them behind tooling.
- Operational steps are written for review and rehearsal.
What I Built
- Active/passive multi-region recovery model with explicit RTO and RPO considerations.
- Infrastructure-as-code structure for primary and recovery region responsibilities.
- Failover runbook covering decision points, traffic movement, recovery checks and ownership.
- Evidence notes that distinguish backup capability from tested recoverability.
Recovery Controls
- Health checks and failover decisions are treated as operational controls.
- Recovery validation includes service availability, data expectations and dependency checks.
- Runbooks make manual dependencies visible before an incident occurs.
- Cost boundaries are documented so resilience planning remains practical and reviewable.
Engineering Controls
Failure Analysis
The recovery design considers regional loss, dependency failure, stale data, incomplete failover and rollback conditions. It treats recovery as an exercised operating capability, not a backup checkbox.
Completed Result
The completed project demonstrates a documented and validated recovery pattern with clear objectives, infrastructure structure, failover procedures and evidence. It shows how recoverability is designed and reviewed as an operating capability rather than assumed from the existence of backups.
Source Code
The repository contains the implementation, documentation and supporting evidence.
Engineering Value
This project shows reliability ownership: recovery objectives, failover decisioning, operational runbooks, validation evidence and cost-aware risk management.