Library · MIDs · Guide
Backup vs load balance — claim map
GuideBackup vs load balance — claim mapBack to article
Written kick-in is failover. Splitting to calm a ratio is hiding. Filter the claim. Spare MID alone is neither.
| Claim | Reality | Get in writing | Do not |
|---|---|---|---|
| Two MIDs means I have a backup | No. Backup needs a written kick-in — cap, CB floor, never-flip | The flip rule for this spare | Call a folder of IDs a failover plan |
| Even leftover cap proves clean load balance | No. Even leftover can still hide a hot ratio | Why the split exists — and that the acquirer was told | Trust pretty utilization as intent |
| Always sending 30% to the spare is kick-in | No. That is a standing split. Kick-in fires on a trigger | What event moves volume — and what never flips | Rename a permanent slice as failover |
| Hard fraud can ride the backup to save the sale | No. Never-flip list. Hopping dead cards buys chargebacks | Never-flip families on this sheet | Open the spare for pick-up or confirmed fraud |
| This map is the kick-in checklist | No. Kick-in ticks the written parts. This map separates backup vs hide | N/A — open kick-in when writing the rule | Skip the sheet because you named the fork |
| This map types leftover cap | No. Volume allocation types caps and leftover. This map is intent | N/A — open volume allocation for the numbers | Hide a ratio and call it backup math |
Filter the claim. Backup needs a written flip. Honest load balance needs caps/failover and a told acquirer. Splitting to hide a ratio is a different intent.
Pairing procedure: Backup kick-in is not load-balance theater. Topic: MIDs.
Work with us — We run this job on your accounts. Services