Redundancy for availability and locality Keeping a separate full copy of the database at multiple locations is known as:

Introduction / Context:
Replication stores duplicate copies of data across sites or servers for availability, read scaling, and locality. It differs from partitioning, which splits the data. Replication policies (synchronous vs asynchronous) and topologies (primary–secondary, multi-primary) influence consistency and latency guarantees.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Multiple sites each maintain a copy of the same database (full or partial).
• Replication mechanisms keep copies in sync.
• Goal: identify the correct term for “separate copy at multiple locations.”

Concept / Approach:

Replication == duplication; partitioning == division. Horizontal partitioning divides rows among sites; vertical partitioning divides columns. Hybrid uses both. Replication may be layered atop partitioning (e.g., each shard is replicated) to achieve both scale and availability.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

DBMS manuals describe replication for HA/DR and geo-distribution; partitioning is used for scale-out and data placement.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Horizontal/vertical/hybrid: these distribute parts of the data, not full copies.
• Erasure coding: parity-based redundancy, not verbatim full copies.

Common Pitfalls:

• Assuming replication alone ensures consistency; mode matters (sync/async).

Final Answer:

Data replication.