 |
|
| UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
| Reply |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
PC backups
As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I
really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? To be honest, although I have several Gb of data I need to have backed up, there's only a few Mb per week which are changed or added, so really all I need to do is a regular cumulative [1] backup rather than backing up the whole damned lot at least every week - and for that purpose CD-RW is probably fine? Except that cumulative backups are not supported by Windows Backup AFAIK... Your thoughts very much welcomed! David [1] if I understand the terms correctly, cumulative backups record all changes since the last full, archival backup, which is what I need; whereas incremental backups just save everything since the previous incremental backup (a bit tortuous and useless) |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
David wrote:
What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? Backing up onto another machine is really the only sensible option. Who needs to be faffing around with CD-Rs? Write a short shell script to do the backup for you. You're on win, so you'll need to use xcopy. Use the task scheduler to run the script every night. For increased protection, put a raid array in your backup machine. That way you have redundancy for all the data backed up from all your other machines. All of this is much simpler than it sounds. If you haven't done it before, google and ask questions, but anyone with basic skills can do it. -- Grunff |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
"David" wrote in message om... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? To be honest, although I have several Gb of data I need to have backed up, there's only a few Mb per week which are changed or added, so really all I need to do is a regular cumulative [1] backup rather than backing up the whole damned lot at least every week - and for that purpose CD-RW is probably fine? Except that cumulative backups are not supported by Windows Backup AFAIK... Your thoughts very much welcomed! David [1] if I understand the terms correctly, cumulative backups record all changes since the last full, archival backup, which is what I need; whereas incremental backups just save everything since the previous incremental backup (a bit tortuous and useless) I use a second HDD which is permanently installed in the machine, but is only used for backups of important files. The operating system is on its own removable disks, so if the machine goes down, I can at least reload the main bits. But having the second back-up drive is ideal because the machine detects it and will use it like any other driver it has, so it makes back-ups directly without having to copy through software then on to removable media. The regular back-up is scheduled for the early hours of the morning, and it works really well. The drive is only 20 Gb capacity, which, after nine years (yes it's been in three machines) is not even a third used and it also holds some of my needed software programs which you can't anymore. The other bits and pieces are all on floppy. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
"David" wrote in message om... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? To be honest, although I have several Gb of data I need to have backed up, there's only a few Mb per week which are changed or added, so really all I need to do is a regular cumulative [1] backup rather than backing up the whole damned lot at least every week - and for that purpose CD-RW is probably fine? Except that cumulative backups are not supported by Windows Backup AFAIK... If it's that important then splash out on a tape drive, keep a tape at home and another at a relative's house. As additional security I'd also consider a RAID array on the workstation. Rgds Andy R |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In article ,
BigWallop wrote: I use a second HDD which is permanently installed in the machine, but is only used for backups of important files. The operating system is on its own removable disks, so if the machine goes down, I can at least reload the main bits. But having the second back-up drive is ideal because the machine detects it and will use it like any other driver it has, so it makes back-ups directly without having to copy through software then on to removable media. Same with me. However, if the machine was stolen or devoured by fire... -- *The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard * Dave Plowman London SW 12 RIP Acorn |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
"David" wrote in message om... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? I use a 2-stage process. Step 1 is an automatic backup over the network to a dedicated hard disk in one of the other PCs. The second step is a once-per-week backup from the hard disk to DVD. With the falling price of DVD writers and the capacity of the media, I can't see the point in messing around with either multiple CDs or unreliable tape drives. If you're backing up over the network, you might want to consider a wired connection rather than wireless. The realistic bandwidth with 802.11b is less than stunning and the new 802.11g, although having a quoted max bandwidth of 54mb, hasn't in my experience lived up to the hype. And while you may think that you don't need the bandwidth, just wait until the first time you're sat there grinding you teeth while a multi-megabyte file restores. Wired network would work out cheaper as well. hth Clive |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
I agree with the final post about the lack of speed on wireless,
100Mhz Ethernet is usefull. I upgraded mt stuff as I found myself regularly moving a few hundred Megabytes between a laptop and desktop and 10Mhz was slow. Also watch out for damp and other environmental issues in a garage. On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:03:56 GMT, "Clive Summerfield" wrote: "David" wrote in message . com... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? I use a 2-stage process. Step 1 is an automatic backup over the network to a dedicated hard disk in one of the other PCs. The second step is a once-per-week backup from the hard disk to DVD. With the falling price of DVD writers and the capacity of the media, I can't see the point in messing around with either multiple CDs or unreliable tape drives. If you're backing up over the network, you might want to consider a wired connection rather than wireless. The realistic bandwidth with 802.11b is less than stunning and the new 802.11g, although having a quoted max bandwidth of 54mb, hasn't in my experience lived up to the hype. And while you may think that you don't need the bandwidth, just wait until the first time you're sat there grinding you teeth while a multi-megabyte file restores. Wired network would work out cheaper as well. hth Clive Lawrence usenet at lklyne dt co dt uk |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. Use XP's backup. Then use WinZip on the output from XP's backup (which in my case reduces the size by about 50%). Then use WinZip again to split the ZIP file into 650MB chucks (this is one of the standard options). Rob |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On 6 Oct 2003 06:14:02 -0700, (David)
wrote: As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... I've tried various methods over several years, and by far and away the best method (which I still use today) is to add a 2nd hard disk drive to the PC and then use something like Norton Ghost (DOS) or Acronis TrueImage to drop an exact copy of the primary disk onto it. Then if your primary drive goes tits up you can replace it and restore your system in under 30 minutes (I know, I've done that). The 2nd hard disk should be at least half the size of the first, so if you have a 20Gb drive as your primary drive the 2nd drive should be 10Gb or larger. Make it equal in size if you can. You then partition and format the new drive as one large disk using FAT32. Then use TrueImage (runs under Windows) to create a backup: http://www.acronis.com Inexpensive, and it can store to writeable CDs as well if you want the security of having an offline backup. I would suggest you throw away the idea of using Windows integrated backup or similar software, at best they only store the data - and if you lose the hard disk you still have to do a full Windows installation before restoring your data. TrueImage allows you to restore single files as you need. PoP |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
You need a "differential" backup then.
Look at some form of "off-line" media such as tape or DVD-R as both machine's discs could be taken out by a powercut/lightning strike etc - It's happened to me. I use DDS-3 DAT tapes to backup data, which I find as long as I don't keep re-using old tapes more than about 10 times is fine. Each tape holds 12GB native / 24 GB compressed (realisticly about 16-18GB each). Plenty of backup applications out there, or windows own is OK. DVD is very cheap now and has loads of other uses also, and you can get 4.7GB per disc costing about 80p, or about £3 for a DVD-RW disc. You can get a writer for under £100 at ebuyer.com. Alan. "David" wrote in message om... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? To be honest, although I have several Gb of data I need to have backed up, there's only a few Mb per week which are changed or added, so really all I need to do is a regular cumulative [1] backup rather than backing up the whole damned lot at least every week - and for that purpose CD-RW is probably fine? Except that cumulative backups are not supported by Windows Backup AFAIK... Your thoughts very much welcomed! David [1] if I understand the terms correctly, cumulative backups record all changes since the last full, archival backup, which is what I need; whereas incremental backups just save everything since the previous incremental backup (a bit tortuous and useless) |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
I've tried various methods over several years, and by far and away the
best method (which I still use today) is to add a 2nd hard disk drive to the PC and then use something like Norton Ghost (DOS) or Acronis TrueImage to drop an exact copy of the primary disk onto it. This only covers the situation when you have a disk failure or similar. It does not help in the event of total loss, such as fire or theft. Christian. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On 6 Oct 2003 06:14:02 -0700, (David)
wrote: As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? A second machine or a second HD would be advisable. Try http://www.webattack.com/get/taskzip.html To go with it. -- Alan G "The corporate life [of society] must be subservient to the lives of the parts instead of the lives of the parts being subservient to the corporate life." (Herbert Spencer) |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:21:42 +0100, PoP wrote:
On 6 Oct 2003 06:14:02 -0700, (David) wrote: As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... I've tried various methods over several years, and by far and away the best method (which I still use today) is to add a 2nd hard disk drive to the PC and then use something like Norton Ghost (DOS) or Acronis TrueImage to drop an exact copy of the primary disk onto it. Then if your primary drive goes tits up you can replace it and restore your system in under 30 minutes (I know, I've done that). A second HD is very quick and convenient but it does not protect against some scumbag running off with your PC, or a lightning strike/PSU fault blowing up both HDs. |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 17:28:57 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
wrote: This only covers the situation when you have a disk failure or similar. It does not help in the event of total loss, such as fire or theft. If you read my complete post you will notice that I did advise that you can send the backup to writeable CDs.....it's a bit slower and you have to change the CD when requested, but it works fine. Possibly the better option with that approach might be to write the backup to the hard disk in 650Mb chunks - this means the files are created automatically without having to change CDs, and then once the backup is finished you can store elsewhere. Don't forget that some online services allow you to store your backups on their servers, and will provide a CD copy on request if you happen to lose everything. When I looked at that option a while back it was relatively expensive so I didn't go down that route, but it is an option if your PC is mission critical to a business. PoP |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:11:18 +0100, Mike Harrison
wrote: A second HD is very quick and convenient but it does not protect against some scumbag running off with your PC, or a lightning strike/PSU fault blowing up both HDs. From my original post: Inexpensive, and it can store to writeable CDs as well if you want the security of having an offline backup. I fully concur that it is not in itself a "perfect" solution in writing to a 2nd disk - which is why you should write to CD and store offline, at least some of the time. The OP advised that he used XP backup (if memory serves me right). The "problem" with any backup program of that nature is that it will do a fine job of backing up the data held on the system - but it will not (usually) perform a backup which you can roll back onto the hard disk to instantly restore your system. Instead you have several hours of installing Windows onto the hard disk, then the application programs, some configuration to carry out - and finally the restore of the data from the backup - only to discover that you've overlooked backing up an important data file or whatever. With utilities such as Acronis TrueImage and Norton Ghost the entire disk is dumped to backup sets. Lose the hard disk - no problem, perform a restore to put your disk back to the exact way it was before the last backup. No messing around, and I know from experience that it then takes just half an hour to restore a fairly large hard disk to operational status - with no messing around with configuration etc. YMMV - but farting around with backup utilities which don't copy the entire hard disk sector by sector is something I did a very long time ago, at a time when I would occasionally lose the hard disk and then spend days trying to get back to an operational state. PoP |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In article , Mike Harrison
writes The ability to back up a whole disc on a single tape makes backing up a lot less hassle, and therefore much more likely to be donbe regularly. as you can just start it off and then leave it to it (e.g. overnight). No messing with tape changes or incremental backups. You'll get as many opinions as there are readers on this (probably), but the key thing about using tape and proper backup software are these: 1. The ability to take data off-site - if the house burns you have at least got your data. 3. The ability to restore everything (disaster recovery) simply and easily. Boot from the DR disks, restore off tape, reboot, done. 4. The ability to easily keep multiple versions of your data. This is crucial for recovering from viruses - roll back to the latest virus-free version as your recovery point. 5. Speed: tapes are up to 3x faster than typical disks. 6. Robustness: tape isn't perfect, but in the worst case, you've a better chance of getting data back off tape than from any other computer medium. Hard disks which fail mechanically are usually scrap metal (but head actuator magnets are cool!), and CD-R and CD-RW are notorious. Magneto-optical disk is probably the longest-lived format, but it's uncommon and very expensive. 7. Lowest cost/GB for the tapes over the alternatives (but the drives cost more). I use Nova Backup from www.novastor.com, which is a nice simple 'just plain works' application I've used umpteen backup products from all the major vendors - Novastor is one of my personal favourites for just those reasons. It's a much tougher choice in a commercial environment though. HTH... Regards, Simonm. -- simonm|at|muircom|dot|demon|.|c|oh|dot|u|kay SIMON MUIR, UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY, BRISTOL www.ukip.org EUROPEANS AGAINST THE EU www.members.aol.com/eurofaq GT250A'76 R80/RT'86 110CSW TD'88 www.kc3ltd.co.uk/profile/eurofollie/ |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
I backup weekly to an external HD - 120 gb in a Belkin housing - a complete
partition image. This should allow me to simply plug this into a different computer if need be. I also back up "My Documents" and other critical system files to 2 DVD-RW's - the same data to 2 different disks. I also back up live documents to CD-RW or DVD RW or may store a copy of the file on an email server temporarary. It is important to make at least 2 copies of the data, and store these in different locations - together with copies of emergency boot disk. I use PowerQuest drive image, but am trialing Vertitas Backup and the Norton product. Archival files and photos I am transfering to DVD, after reading some concerns on the life of CD-R media dg "David" wrote in message om... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? To be honest, although I have several Gb of data I need to have backed up, there's only a few Mb per week which are changed or added, so really all I need to do is a regular cumulative [1] backup rather than backing up the whole damned lot at least every week - and for that purpose CD-RW is probably fine? Except that cumulative backups are not supported by Windows Backup AFAIK... Your thoughts very much welcomed! David [1] if I understand the terms correctly, cumulative backups record all changes since the last full, archival backup, which is what I need; whereas incremental backups just save everything since the previous incremental backup (a bit tortuous and useless) |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
although i simply use nero and cdr's and back up every week(i download
often) Jeff :-) |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In article ,
says... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. Get another HDD and one of these: http://mcsx.co.uk/shop/prodinfo.php?id=usbhdd35 http://www.gibtek.co.uk/hardware/hdenclosure.php http://www.rlsupplies.co.uk/cat83_1.htm Nice, easy and very fast. Keep it in the car, at the office, etc. -- Hywel I do not eat quiche http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/ http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
Backing up:
Beware of virus problems. A 2nd HDD in your machine gives zero protection to your data if a virus gets it. Many viri can be removed, some can't. When you back up off the machine, again if you get a virus then backup, and thats the only backup you have, youre stuffed. So always keep 2 generations of backups, with the older one being say 2 weeks old, not 2 days. That gives you enough time to spot any heavy handed viri, and still have good clean data. Regards, NT |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:36:13 GMT, SpamTrapSeeSig
wrote: 5. Speed: tapes are up to 3x faster than typical disks. That depends entirely upon the tape drive. Some drives could be 10x slower than disk. SCSI tapes are likely to be faster than other methods, but just getting any old tape drive does not equate to "faster". PoP |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In article , Huge
writes SpamTrapSeeSig writes: [21 lines snipped] 5. Speed: tapes are up to 3x faster than typical disks. Only if you mean CD/DVD. Tapes are orders of magnitude slower than hard disk drives. Sorry, but they're not. *Old* tape drives may be slower than modern disks, but current tape drives are considerably faster than current disks, comparing sustained transfer rates for both. Disk manufacturers use RAM buffering (cacheing) to boost perceived performance, but sustained transfers, such as backups and restores, really test disk data channels fully. In sustained transfers, caches have almost no effect on overall performance. Regards, Simonm. -- simonm|at|muircom|dot|demon|.|c|oh|dot|u|kay SIMON MUIR, UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY, BRISTOL www.ukip.org EUROPEANS AGAINST THE EU www.members.aol.com/eurofaq GT250A'76 R80/RT'86 110CSW TD'88 www.kc3ltd.co.uk/profile/eurofollie/ |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In article , PoP
writes On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:36:13 GMT, SpamTrapSeeSig wrote: 5. Speed: tapes are up to 3x faster than typical disks. That depends entirely upon the tape drive. Some drives could be 10x slower than disk. SCSI tapes are likely to be faster than other methods, but just getting any old tape drive does not equate to "faster". I don't remember saying that it did. See my other post regarding disk v. tape performance. Regards, Simonm. -- simonm|at|muircom|dot|demon|.|c|oh|dot|u|kay SIMON MUIR, UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY, BRISTOL www.ukip.org EUROPEANS AGAINST THE EU www.members.aol.com/eurofaq GT250A'76 R80/RT'86 110CSW TD'88 www.kc3ltd.co.uk/profile/eurofollie/ |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
Yet another opinion here ;-) Me, I use a "real" backup programme, Dantz's
Retrospect (www.dantz.com). What makes it Real IMNSHO is that it keeps its own catalogues of which files have and haven't been backed up; all of the toy programs which use the PC file system's "archive" bit will fail to include files you've changed if you use more than one such program, or if you back up to multiple places. Retrospect allows you to run, say, 3 sets of backup media, to which it will add all relevant files you've worked on or created since the last time you used *that* *particular* backup set. And you can create multiple backup destinations: within the machine - e.g. on another hard drive or partition in the same machine; on removeable media - tape, CD-R or -RW, DVD-R/RW; and on other machines (both as normal network shares, and through the pricier Retrospect client-server arrangments). Its built-in system-recovery stuff has worked for me on the one occasion it really needed to; and single-file restores are easy too. Storage is cheap enough these days (and uk.d-i-y types are almost bound to have an older PC up in the loft they couldn't bear to throw away!) that working hard on compression and proprietary formats is probably an error. (Accepting that Retrospect is a proprietary format, mind, though it does have a handy "duplicate" subfunction; though something like FileSync will do that and cost less). You have to think through what's going to be most of a pain for you to reconstruct. If you have a pretty standard OS install with just a few add-on apps, the claim that backing up your individually created data is Enough is relatively plausible: it makes retrieving accidentally deleted precious stuff easy enough, and leaves you facing an OS+apps reinstall in the worst case. If you've rather a lot of apps, patches, updated drivers, firewall customisations, etc. etc. applied to your OS, and you value your time and sanity, backing up the whole shebang and TESTING THE EMERGENCY RESTORE PROCEDURE WHEN YOU'RE NOT STRESSED OUT is a Good Idea. Whichever solution you go for, it'll be a lot easier if you've created a number of distinct partitions for different kinds of Stuff than if it's all lumped under "C:\". F'r instance, on the Winblows systems I run I have an OS partition (W: or X  , a Data partition (D with a subdirectoryfor my hand-created most-precious data and one for my apps, a "Fragephera" partition on F: for temporary files, web cache, and all that junk, a swap partition (Swapee on E , and one or two "big" partitions for picturesand music. Oh, for the NT-based systems there's a small FAT partition which holds BOOT.INI, NTDETECT, and that other initial-boot junk, and some system recovery tools. Having this stuff in these different containers makes it easier to create backup strategies for different needs, and different file systems for different tasks (e.g.: the app and OS partitions are NTFS, so that any malicious software running under my "normal, unprivileged" user wouldn't be able to infect most of my binaries; the audio/picture partitions are tuned to storing a small number of large files (big clusters), while Fragephera is done with tiny clusters). Hope that helps some (and look - no advertising, even peripherally, well until this point anyway, for the excellent DDS and AIT tape drives made at the HP site in Bristol ;-) - Stefek |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
|
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 15:21:42 UTC, PoP
wrote: I've tried various methods over several years, and by far and away the best method (which I still use today) is to add a 2nd hard disk drive to the PC and then use something like Norton Ghost (DOS) or Acronis TrueImage to drop an exact copy of the primary disk onto it. Then if your primary drive goes tits up you can replace it and restore your system in under 30 minutes (I know, I've done that). What do you do about power surges/burglars that take out both disks? -- Bob Eager rde at tavi.co.uk PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3, P70... |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:36:13 UTC, SpamTrapSeeSig
wrote: 5. Speed: tapes are up to 3x faster than typical disks. Even if they were (and they're not)....how do you get this extra speed. After all, you're copying from...er....a disk! -- Bob Eager rde at tavi.co.uk PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3, P70... |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:21:33 UTC, PoP
wrote: On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:11:18 +0100, Mike Harrison wrote: A second HD is very quick and convenient but it does not protect against some scumbag running off with your PC, or a lightning strike/PSU fault blowing up both HDs. From my original post: Inexpensive, and it can store to writeable CDs as well if you want the security of having an offline backup. Yes, but your original post appeared to throw that in as an afterthought... I fully concur that it is not in itself a "perfect" solution in writing to a 2nd disk - which is why you should write to CD and store offline, at least some of the time. Often. -- Bob Eager rde at tavi.co.uk PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3, P70... |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
David wrote:
What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? Hi Probably a little more esoteric than most home installs but... Linux server running Samba and acting as roaming profile store. Couple of machines using the roaming profiles. Allows us to move from machine to machine and see the same shortcuts, etc. I also use disk caddies, so have 3 'personalities' for my main machine depending on whether I'm using Win95, Win98, various development tools, etc. These machines effectively hold OS and local apps only. I Ghost these after app install but before any usage, so when they go a bit wierd I just resplat the primary disk with the Ghost image. Samba 'home' drive mapped so all Word, etc. files are stored on Linux box. Shell scripts every night to gzip all files changed in last 7 days on home drives to daily backup file. Scripts also housekeep old backup files to bit bucket (30 day retention IIRC). 7 days so if the machine is off for a couple of nights things still get picked up somethime. Periodic backup of gzip files to CD-ROM. Occasional full backup too. Not as often as I should! HTH IanC -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
"Clive Summerfield" wrote in message ... "David" wrote in message om... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... At the moment I back up onto CD-RW, using Windows XP's built-in backup software, which bizarrely doesn't let you save directly to CDs - an extraordinary PITA which means you have to create sequential files on the HD less than 650Mb, then copy them over manually. So I do this far less often than I should. My idea was to set up my old unused PII machine in the back of my garage with a wireless network card, then do my regular back-ups to its hard disk. The principle being that if my house burns down or is burgled, the (detached) garage is unlikely to be similar affected (and vice versa if the garage is hit). Couldn't replace CDs altogether due to risk of losing all to a virus, I suppose. Does this sound like a reasonable/cost-effective solution (I currently have only a hard-wired network and router). What do others use/do? Is there a better hardware/software combo that I should use instead? I use a 2-stage process. Step 1 is an automatic backup over the network to a dedicated hard disk in one of the other PCs. The second step is a once-per-week backup from the hard disk to DVD. With the falling price of DVD writers and the capacity of the media, I can't see the point in messing around with either multiple CDs or unreliable tape drives. What is the price a storage capacity of a stand alone with USB cxn DVD writer? --- -- Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 18/09/2003 |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
"IMM" wrote in message ... "Clive Summerfield" wrote in message ... I use a 2-stage process. Step 1 is an automatic backup over the network to a dedicated hard disk in one of the other PCs. The second step is a once-per-week backup from the hard disk to DVD. With the falling price of DVD writers and the capacity of the media, I can't see the point in messing around with either multiple CDs or unreliable tape drives. What is the price a storage capacity of a stand alone with USB cxn DVD writer? The Sony DRX-510UL External DVD/-RW drive comes in at about £250 inc vat. Requires either firewire or USB 2.0 for connecting to your pc. 32x CD read, 24x CD write, 16x CD rewrite, 12x DVD read, 4x DVD write, 2x DVD-RW rewrite, 4x DVD+RW rewrite. Capacity is 4.7Gb. hth Clive |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In message , David
writes As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... DVD writer? Or ... a removable Hard disk -- raden |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In message , Clive
Summerfield writes "David" wrote in message . com... As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... If you're backing up over the network, you might want to consider a wired connection rather than wireless. The realistic bandwidth with 802.11b is less than stunning and the new 802.11g, although having a quoted max bandwidth of 54mb, hasn't in my experience lived up to the hype. And while you may think that you don't need the bandwidth, just wait until the first time you're sat there grinding you teeth while a multi-megabyte file restores. Wired network would work out cheaper as well. If the OP's so concerned about backing up, one thing which I've just though of is the problem of viruses, which you often don't know you have until it's too late. Thus your last back up might be infected, wheras if you have e.g. discrete weekly backups, the chances of you being able to restore an uninfected version are better. TBH, you only really want to back up your data files, and re-install programs (which you can also copy onto a DVD) -- raden |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In message , PoP
writes The 2nd hard disk should be at least half the size of the first, so if you have a 20Gb drive as your primary drive the 2nd drive should be 10Gb or larger. Make it equal in size if you can. I haven't seen anything less than a 40Gig drive for sale for a while now. -- raden |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
In message , Mike Harrison
writes On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:21:42 +0100, PoP wrote: On 6 Oct 2003 06:14:02 -0700, (David) wrote: As the organization of my home life becomes ever more paperless I really need to sort out my strategy for backing up my PC on a thorough and regular basis... bit OT I know, but (a) I really value the opinions of like-minded people in this NG, and (b) the idea I want feedback on is sort-of diy related... I've tried various methods over several years, and by far and away the best method (which I still use today) is to add a 2nd hard disk drive to the PC and then use something like Norton Ghost (DOS) or Acronis TrueImage to drop an exact copy of the primary disk onto it. Then if your primary drive goes tits up you can replace it and restore your system in under 30 minutes (I know, I've done that). A second HD is very quick and convenient but it does not protect against some scumbag running off with your PC, or a lightning strike/PSU fault blowing up both HDs. It does if you remove it and keep, it somewhere safe other than when you are actually doing a backup -- raden |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
|
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
|
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On 6 Oct 2003 21:13:34 GMT, "Bob Eager" wrote:
What do you do about power surges/burglars that take out both disks? I have 5 PCs running here in different parts of the house. Some of those are on independent UPS's - so surges aren't likely to ruin my day. I routinely copy the backup sets across the network so that the backups are on multiple independent drives in different PCs. Important data is backed off to CDRW. PoP |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
PC backups
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 23:14:46 +0100, raden wrote:
I haven't seen anything less than a 40Gig drive for sale for a while now. I omitted to say that - but it is possible a 2nd hard drive could be acquired from ebay or similar. PoP |
Linear Mode
