XP Pro Backup Utility - Not Quite Getting it

[Guest]

I started a 'backup the entire computer' operation on my laptop to an
external hard drive. It's clicking away and now I'm not so sure this was a
great idea (for one thing, I have 36 gigs of data on the entire computer and
I have to wonder if all this churning might do in my computer before it's
even 'safely' backed up

Question 1 - I just want to have an entire backup if my computer crashes or
is even stolen (assume the external hd with backup is kept in another
location). Is this a truly workable utility to be able to do that?

Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files. I know I should use
what they call an 'incremental' backup, but I don't understand if I will
backup to the SAME file name I used for this first backup (eg.
"Everything.bkf") or if I will backup to a NEW backup file name? I could
understand if it was the SAME file - and it would only replace/update the
changed files and also add the new ones. But if I'm supposed to create a NEW
file, I am confused on how anyone could perform an efficient restore
operation from what would end up being many, many '.bfk' files (having
multiple versions of the same backed up [but modified since] files).

Question 3 - BONUS question Does anybody know what will happen if I hit
the cancel button now that I've started this backup? (You can assume I use
the backup type that clears the Archive checkbox attributes). Specifically,
will what has already backed up be good and can I later continue with the
rest of the backup? This has alot to do with Question 2 since if maybe if I
just backup to the same backup file name as an 'incremental' backup, it would
seem I'd be good to continue the backup?

Thanks for helping me.

 

[Gary Walker]

Well, I'm no expert in backup, but I do use it every day
in various flavors, and have used it for restore also....

I started a 'backup the entire computer' operation on my laptop to an
external hard drive. It's clicking away and now I'm not so sure this was a
great idea (for one thing, I have 36 gigs of data on the entire computer
and
I have to wonder if all this churning might do in my computer before it's
even 'safely' backed up

I doubt that any harm is about to come to your laptop,
other than a battery depletion. I assume you're running
with AC power. I also assume this Ext.HD is USB.

Of course, it's best if this is USB2, not USB1.x.

Question 1 - I just want to have an entire backup if my computer crashes
or
is even stolen (assume the external hd with backup is kept in another
location). Is this a truly workable utility to be able to do that?

Yeah, but...

With what you've described you will not be able to rest-
ore the entire OS upon a failure/theft/etc. Although I've
not experimented with this, you'll need something called
an (A)utomated (S)ystem (R)ecovery image.

Based on what I read, and you can see by review of the
Backup help documents on the topic of ASR, this seems
to be a bootable stub that you store away until needed.

When the time comes, it sounds like you'd boot this ASR
image and use the minimal system to restore components
from your periodic backup. Perhaps someone else can
elaborate/correct my assumptions here. Unfortunately,
again referring to the ASR documentation, a 1.44mb
FD will be required for the ASR image recording. I due
recall playing with this once, but I don't have that drive.

It seems that a CD/DVD could be substituded for this
drive requirement, but I don't recall the experimentation
experience. It seems like, as I recall, it really means a
1.44mb diskette - no exceptions.

Of course, my plans regarding any restore needs would
be precluded by an entire system reload using shipped
distribution media. Then, user data would be restored
from there. Of course, I will lose any/all updates applied,
but those can be re-applied.

Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files. I know I should
use
what they call an 'incremental' backup, but I don't understand if I will
backup to the SAME file name I used for this first backup (eg.
"Everything.bkf") or if I will backup to a NEW backup file name? I could
understand if it was the SAME file - and it would only replace/update the
changed files and also add the new ones. But if I'm supposed to create a
NEW
file, I am confused on how anyone could perform an efficient restore
operation from what would end up being many, many '.bfk' files (having
multiple versions of the same backed up [but modified since] files).

The subsequent backup(s) always point to the initial bac-
kup(*.bkf) file for the incremental backup. I run this inc-
remental backup for a week, beginning the new week
with an overlay(normal) backup. My reason for this is:

If you've completed 6 incremental backups, and then just
simulate a restore to look at the .bkf structure, you'll see:

There will be 6 distinct images for your full backup target.
The first image will be the base image, containing your
complete backup target. The other 5 will contain comp-
lete directory images of your backup target but, only the
members changed will be included in the respective dir-
ectories. So, if you want to fully restore 1 complete dir-
ectory, you really should restore image #1, followed by
#2, #3,.... #6, in that order. Of course, if you know the
data, and what you're looking for, you could just restore
#3, or #5. But, depending on the member update activity,
#4 might be the last backup to contain the member that
you are/were looking for. If you merely continue to run
daily incrementals for say - 100 days, you're gonna' have
100 full path incrementals to look through to find the last
version of a specific member you might be tracking.

Using this structure has the benefit of both incremental
backup, and versioning. A single member may have ch-
anged on every day of your daily backups, and you'd
have 6 copies of that member. Each in various stage of
change. If the incremental was simply a member overlay
based on change activity, you'd have no versioning
recovery path.

With the backup execution, a text document log entry is
created to record the details of the backup. These log
entries are placed in an "ntbackup" directory in a 10
entry rotation. When the 11th backup rolls out, the 1st
backup log gets overwritten.

One other possibly important issue is that if you choose
to restore a single member/directory/etc. unless you
specify "single folder" mapping, the entire path get re-
built. This means that all the higher lever "empty" direct-
ories will be part of the restore package.

Question 3 - BONUS question Does anybody know what will happen if I hit
the cancel button now that I've started this backup? (You can assume I use
the backup type that clears the Archive checkbox attributes).
Specifically,
will what has already backed up be good and can I later continue with the
rest of the backup? This has alot to do with Question 2 since if maybe if
I
just backup to the same backup file name as an 'incremental' backup, it
would
seem I'd be good to continue the backup?

I really don't know the answer to that, but I really don't
think backup interacts much/any with archive. IOW, I
don't think the archive setting carries any weight in the
backup operation. I think the backup is driven only by
the specified target, mitigated by any update activity.



Thanks,



Gary

 

[Guest]

That was extremely helpful Gary.
I spent ALOT of time reading up before my post (and not getting anywhere).
You gave me the overview and details I needed. Thanks!
--

Well, I'm no expert in backup, but I do use it every day
in various flavors, and have used it for restore also....

I started a 'backup the entire computer' operation on my laptop to an
external hard drive. It's clicking away and now I'm not so sure this was a
great idea (for one thing, I have 36 gigs of data on the entire computer
and
I have to wonder if all this churning might do in my computer before it's
even 'safely' backed up

I doubt that any harm is about to come to your laptop,
other than a battery depletion. I assume you're running
with AC power. I also assume this Ext.HD is USB.

Of course, it's best if this is USB2, not USB1.x.

Question 1 - I just want to have an entire backup if my computer crashes
or
is even stolen (assume the external hd with backup is kept in another
location). Is this a truly workable utility to be able to do that?

Yeah, but...

With what you've described you will not be able to rest-
ore the entire OS upon a failure/theft/etc. Although I've
not experimented with this, you'll need something called
an (A)utomated (S)ystem (R)ecovery image.

Based on what I read, and you can see by review of the
Backup help documents on the topic of ASR, this seems
to be a bootable stub that you store away until needed.

When the time comes, it sounds like you'd boot this ASR
image and use the minimal system to restore components
from your periodic backup. Perhaps someone else can
elaborate/correct my assumptions here. Unfortunately,
again referring to the ASR documentation, a 1.44mb
FD will be required for the ASR image recording. I due
recall playing with this once, but I don't have that drive.

It seems that a CD/DVD could be substituded for this
drive requirement, but I don't recall the experimentation
experience. It seems like, as I recall, it really means a
1.44mb diskette - no exceptions.

Of course, my plans regarding any restore needs would
be precluded by an entire system reload using shipped
distribution media. Then, user data would be restored
from there. Of course, I will lose any/all updates applied,
but those can be re-applied.

Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files. I know I should
use
what they call an 'incremental' backup, but I don't understand if I will
backup to the SAME file name I used for this first backup (eg.
"Everything.bkf") or if I will backup to a NEW backup file name? I could
understand if it was the SAME file - and it would only replace/update the
changed files and also add the new ones. But if I'm supposed to create a
NEW
file, I am confused on how anyone could perform an efficient restore
operation from what would end up being many, many '.bfk' files (having
multiple versions of the same backed up [but modified since] files).

The subsequent backup(s) always point to the initial bac-
kup(*.bkf) file for the incremental backup. I run this inc-
remental backup for a week, beginning the new week
with an overlay(normal) backup. My reason for this is:

If you've completed 6 incremental backups, and then just
simulate a restore to look at the .bkf structure, you'll see:

There will be 6 distinct images for your full backup target.
The first image will be the base image, containing your
complete backup target. The other 5 will contain comp-
lete directory images of your backup target but, only the
members changed will be included in the respective dir-
ectories. So, if you want to fully restore 1 complete dir-
ectory, you really should restore image #1, followed by
#2, #3,.... #6, in that order. Of course, if you know the
data, and what you're looking for, you could just restore
#3, or #5. But, depending on the member update activity,
#4 might be the last backup to contain the member that
you are/were looking for. If you merely continue to run
daily incrementals for say - 100 days, you're gonna' have
100 full path incrementals to look through to find the last
version of a specific member you might be tracking.

Using this structure has the benefit of both incremental
backup, and versioning. A single member may have ch-
anged on every day of your daily backups, and you'd
have 6 copies of that member. Each in various stage of
change. If the incremental was simply a member overlay
based on change activity, you'd have no versioning
recovery path.

With the backup execution, a text document log entry is
created to record the details of the backup. These log
entries are placed in an "ntbackup" directory in a 10
entry rotation. When the 11th backup rolls out, the 1st
backup log gets overwritten.

One other possibly important issue is that if you choose
to restore a single member/directory/etc. unless you
specify "single folder" mapping, the entire path get re-
built. This means that all the higher lever "empty" direct-
ories will be part of the restore package.

Question 3 - BONUS question Does anybody know what will happen if I hit
the cancel button now that I've started this backup? (You can assume I use
the backup type that clears the Archive checkbox attributes).
Specifically,
will what has already backed up be good and can I later continue with the
rest of the backup? This has alot to do with Question 2 since if maybe if
I
just backup to the same backup file name as an 'incremental' backup, it
would
seem I'd be good to continue the backup?

I really don't know the answer to that, but I really don't
think backup interacts much/any with archive. IOW, I
don't think the archive setting carries any weight in the
backup operation. I think the backup is driven only by
the specified target, mitigated by any update activity.



Thanks,



Gary

Thanks for helping me.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Nomad:

Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files.

My guess is that very few people will take the trouble to do it, but here's
another view:

Separate data from your system and back the two up differently.


The ideal way is to partition the laptop's drive so there's 30-40 gigs for
Windows and whatever programs are installed in "C:" and then have whatever's
left as "D:" and put any and all data there. Lacking that, create a "Data"
folder on C, make sure everything gets saved to that folder, and do the data
backups against it.

Once you've separated data and system, backing up the system and backing up data
become two separate issues.

They *should* be separate issues because with the system, you explicitly do
*not* want every change backed up because some changes might be the infestation
of the system with a virus or other malware. Instead you want a backup of the
system in a known "good" state. OTOH, with data you generally want the
latest-and-greatest - with an option to get some prior version of an individual
file being a nice-to-have.

When the system goes south, you just restore from that image - replacing
*everything* that was on C:. If data was on D:, no problem. If it was on
C:\Data, you'd have to follow up with a restore from your data backup.

To back up the system, use a disk imaging utility like Ghost or TeraByte's
"Image". Either burn a stack of DVDs or write the image to an external hard
drive.

To back up data, use any one of dozens of backup utilities - including the one
that comes with Windows. I've been using Retrospect in spite of it's wretched
UI because it lets me recover different versions of files. e.g. if I mess
something up on Wednesday and only discover the fact on Friday... I can drop
back to Monday's or Tuesday's version.

I'm about do ditch Retrospect in favor of something called SecondCopy
(http://www.centered.com/) - which has more/different functionality and a
humongously, vastly, quantum-leap better UI than Retrospect.

I could go on and on about why I've fallen in love with SecondCopy, but suffice
to say I really like it. One killer feature is that I can restore something
without needing any special software. Most backup utilities store the data in a
proprietary DB and you can't get to it without having that backup utility
installed on the PC you want to restore to - as in you're 2,000 miles from home,
five days into a two-week trip and your laptop goes belly-up. Sure, you can
get another one FedExed overnite.... but the backup utility isn't on it and you
can't restore your data....


With a laptop you have the issue of where to put the backed-up data.

With a regular PC, I plug in one of several standalone USB hard drives I keep
for backup purposes. I rotate the drives between home and various work
locations to guard against some destructive event at home.

With a laptop, my bias would be to allocate a folder on the laptop called
"Backup" and have the backup utility keeping it updated every 10 minutes or
every hour or whatever seems useful.

Then I'd do one or more of the following as often as I felt comfortable with:
------------------------------------------
- Burn a DVD
- Burn a CD
- Copy to a thumb drive
- Copy to a standalone USB drive
- Copy to my home PC
------------------------------------------

For traveling, I kind of like the DVD/CD thing because older copies can be
mailed home - offering additional protection in case of lost luggage or theft.

The danger, of course, being that I would neglect to burn that CD or DVD one
night and the next day would be the day the laptop failed.

With SecondCopy, you have the additional option of backing up over the Internet
to some place that you have an account that allows data storage - depending on
data volume and availability/speed of a connection, that might be a doable
alternative.

The important thing being to be covered if the laptop goes "poof"... as in lost
luggage, theft, automobile crash, or just being dropped hard.

 

[Guest]

ok. I've been reviewing your text some more and I'm wondering if you'll
indulge me by reviewing my game plan to see if I have this staight now. And
thanks in advance for your great help if you have the time (or anyone else
cares to join in this marathon of questions . I am hugely thankful if you
can help me.

I understand I will probably need ASR to totally 'bounce back' but in
thinking about things, I really just want my data if I crash/lose the pc.

So here's how I understand this and how I propose to go about things.

My first backup, which was a 'normal' backup of everything on the pc, will
be named, let's say "Everything.bkf"
Now that I have that, my next backup will be an 'incremental' backup and I
will again select the same files and folders to backup (really it's
everything again) but now name this backup file, "Weekly.bkf" (For my needs,
I only really need to backup what has changed once a week)
Here's the part I get a little shaky on . . .
I have now run two backups and created two backup files.
A week has passed since I created "Weekly.bkf".
So now I run backup utility, select the same files and folders to backup,
set an 'incremental' backup, and SET THE TARGET TO 'Weekly.bfk"?? (then
repeat every week hence). By set the target, I mean that this backup has the
same directory path and name (like copying over?) the last incremental
'Weekly.bkf" file which seems a little funny to me - but this is where I'm
fuzzy on things.

If I understand correcly, between these two files, I have a complete backup.
Ofcourse, at some point in future, "Weekly.bfk" will get so large I will
probably want to start this whole process fresh again. Is this a workable
scheme?

I think maybe I'm confused about exactly what happens to the files in the
'Weekly.bfk' when you do an 'incremental' backup over it with the same target
name. If I am totally 'writing over' (wiping out) the "Weekly.bkf" every
week, then I would be missing some of my source files backups that changed
after the 'normal' backup but not after one of the previous 'Weekly.bfk" .. .
since the instructions say, . . "An incremental backup backs up only those
files created or changed since the last normal or incremental backup." Hmm,
this shouldn't be rocket science

As a side question, I guess I'm not sure exactly what the 'normal' type
backup does? Is it's purpose only to copy off everything you selected
(whether changed or not) and then leave behind the 'cleared archive
attribute' to set the stage for future 'incremental' backups? The MS Help
says "You usually perform a normal backup the first time you create a backup
set."

Assuming the 'normal' backup type, always just backs up everything you
select (regardless of changed or not), I would REALLY like to avoid creating
a everything backup using 'normal' backup because my equipment and gig size
makes that a 15 hour deal. Maybe, after my first 'normal' backup to
"Everything.bfk", I really just want to create another everything selection,
set it as 'incremental' backup, and then target to my "Everything.bfk" file?
Would that meet my goals if I did that weekly?

Thanks for your consideration
--

Well, I'm no expert in backup, but I do use it every day
in various flavors, and have used it for restore also....

I started a 'backup the entire computer' operation on my laptop to an
external hard drive. It's clicking away and now I'm not so sure this was a
great idea (for one thing, I have 36 gigs of data on the entire computer
and
I have to wonder if all this churning might do in my computer before it's
even 'safely' backed up

I doubt that any harm is about to come to your laptop,
other than a battery depletion. I assume you're running
with AC power. I also assume this Ext.HD is USB.

Of course, it's best if this is USB2, not USB1.x.

Question 1 - I just want to have an entire backup if my computer crashes
or
is even stolen (assume the external hd with backup is kept in another
location). Is this a truly workable utility to be able to do that?

Yeah, but...

With what you've described you will not be able to rest-
ore the entire OS upon a failure/theft/etc. Although I've
not experimented with this, you'll need something called
an (A)utomated (S)ystem (R)ecovery image.

Based on what I read, and you can see by review of the
Backup help documents on the topic of ASR, this seems
to be a bootable stub that you store away until needed.

When the time comes, it sounds like you'd boot this ASR
image and use the minimal system to restore components
from your periodic backup. Perhaps someone else can
elaborate/correct my assumptions here. Unfortunately,
again referring to the ASR documentation, a 1.44mb
FD will be required for the ASR image recording. I due
recall playing with this once, but I don't have that drive.

It seems that a CD/DVD could be substituded for this
drive requirement, but I don't recall the experimentation
experience. It seems like, as I recall, it really means a
1.44mb diskette - no exceptions.

Of course, my plans regarding any restore needs would
be precluded by an entire system reload using shipped
distribution media. Then, user data would be restored
from there. Of course, I will lose any/all updates applied,
but those can be re-applied.

Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files. I know I should
use
what they call an 'incremental' backup, but I don't understand if I will
backup to the SAME file name I used for this first backup (eg.
"Everything.bkf") or if I will backup to a NEW backup file name? I could
understand if it was the SAME file - and it would only replace/update the
changed files and also add the new ones. But if I'm supposed to create a
NEW
file, I am confused on how anyone could perform an efficient restore
operation from what would end up being many, many '.bfk' files (having
multiple versions of the same backed up [but modified since] files).

The subsequent backup(s) always point to the initial bac-
kup(*.bkf) file for the incremental backup. I run this inc-
remental backup for a week, beginning the new week
with an overlay(normal) backup. My reason for this is:

If you've completed 6 incremental backups, and then just
simulate a restore to look at the .bkf structure, you'll see:

There will be 6 distinct images for your full backup target.
The first image will be the base image, containing your
complete backup target. The other 5 will contain comp-
lete directory images of your backup target but, only the
members changed will be included in the respective dir-
ectories. So, if you want to fully restore 1 complete dir-
ectory, you really should restore image #1, followed by
#2, #3,.... #6, in that order. Of course, if you know the
data, and what you're looking for, you could just restore
#3, or #5. But, depending on the member update activity,
#4 might be the last backup to contain the member that
you are/were looking for. If you merely continue to run
daily incrementals for say - 100 days, you're gonna' have
100 full path incrementals to look through to find the last
version of a specific member you might be tracking.

Using this structure has the benefit of both incremental
backup, and versioning. A single member may have ch-
anged on every day of your daily backups, and you'd
have 6 copies of that member. Each in various stage of
change. If the incremental was simply a member overlay
based on change activity, you'd have no versioning
recovery path.

With the backup execution, a text document log entry is
created to record the details of the backup. These log
entries are placed in an "ntbackup" directory in a 10
entry rotation. When the 11th backup rolls out, the 1st
backup log gets overwritten.

One other possibly important issue is that if you choose
to restore a single member/directory/etc. unless you
specify "single folder" mapping, the entire path get re-
built. This means that all the higher lever "empty" direct-
ories will be part of the restore package.

Question 3 - BONUS question Does anybody know what will happen if I hit
the cancel button now that I've started this backup? (You can assume I use
the backup type that clears the Archive checkbox attributes).
Specifically,
will what has already backed up be good and can I later continue with the
rest of the backup? This has alot to do with Question 2 since if maybe if
I
just backup to the same backup file name as an 'incremental' backup, it
would
seem I'd be good to continue the backup?

I really don't know the answer to that, but I really don't
think backup interacts much/any with archive. IOW, I
don't think the archive setting carries any weight in the
backup operation. I think the backup is driven only by
the specified target, mitigated by any update activity.



Thanks,



Gary

Thanks for helping me.

 

[Guest]

Thanks,
I think I will separate my day to day data from system at some time in the
future. I'm just getting started so baby steps here. I still have some basic
questions in my followup post to Gary and hope to eventually have some input
on those as well.
Thanks for your consideration and advise.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Nomad:

I think I will separate my day to day data from system at some time in the
future.

I probably should have mentioned that it may mostly already be separated using
the directory approach.

C:\Documents and Settings\[YourUserName] is where all the MyThis and MyThat
directories live. Just make sure to save stuff to "MyDocuments" or
"MyWhatever" and back C:\Documents and Settings\[YourUserName] up separately -
if only by copying it manually to a thumb drive.

 

[Gary Walker]

We're starting a small birthday celebration here shortly,
I'll take a look at the plans this evening(CST).

Gary

ok. I've been reviewing your text some more and I'm wondering if you'll
indulge me by reviewing my game plan to see if I have this staight now.
And
thanks in advance for your great help if you have the time (or anyone else
cares to join in this marathon of questions . I am hugely thankful if
you
can help me.

I understand I will probably need ASR to totally 'bounce back' but in
thinking about things, I really just want my data if I crash/lose the pc.

So here's how I understand this and how I propose to go about things.

My first backup, which was a 'normal' backup of everything on the pc, will
be named, let's say "Everything.bkf"
Now that I have that, my next backup will be an 'incremental' backup and I
will again select the same files and folders to backup (really it's
everything again) but now name this backup file, "Weekly.bkf" (For my
needs,
I only really need to backup what has changed once a week)
Here's the part I get a little shaky on . . .
I have now run two backups and created two backup files.
A week has passed since I created "Weekly.bkf".
So now I run backup utility, select the same files and folders to backup,
set an 'incremental' backup, and SET THE TARGET TO 'Weekly.bfk"?? (then
repeat every week hence). By set the target, I mean that this backup has
the
same directory path and name (like copying over?) the last incremental
'Weekly.bkf" file which seems a little funny to me - but this is where I'm
fuzzy on things.

If I understand correcly, between these two files, I have a complete
backup.
Ofcourse, at some point in future, "Weekly.bfk" will get so large I will
probably want to start this whole process fresh again. Is this a workable
scheme?

I think maybe I'm confused about exactly what happens to the files in the
'Weekly.bfk' when you do an 'incremental' backup over it with the same
target
name. If I am totally 'writing over' (wiping out) the "Weekly.bkf" every
week, then I would be missing some of my source files backups that changed
after the 'normal' backup but not after one of the previous 'Weekly.bfk"
.. .
since the instructions say, . . "An incremental backup backs up only
those
files created or changed since the last normal or incremental backup."
Hmm,
this shouldn't be rocket science

As a side question, I guess I'm not sure exactly what the 'normal' type
backup does? Is it's purpose only to copy off everything you selected
(whether changed or not) and then leave behind the 'cleared archive
attribute' to set the stage for future 'incremental' backups? The MS Help
says "You usually perform a normal backup the first time you create a
backup
set."

Assuming the 'normal' backup type, always just backs up everything you
select (regardless of changed or not), I would REALLY like to avoid
creating
a everything backup using 'normal' backup because my equipment and gig
size
makes that a 15 hour deal. Maybe, after my first 'normal' backup to
"Everything.bfk", I really just want to create another everything
selection,
set it as 'incremental' backup, and then target to my "Everything.bfk"
file?
Would that meet my goals if I did that weekly?

Thanks for your consideration
--

Well, I'm no expert in backup, but I do use it every day
in various flavors, and have used it for restore also....

I started a 'backup the entire computer' operation on my laptop to an
external hard drive. It's clicking away and now I'm not so sure this
was a
great idea (for one thing, I have 36 gigs of data on the entire
computer
and
I have to wonder if all this churning might do in my computer before
it's
even 'safely' backed up

I doubt that any harm is about to come to your laptop,
other than a battery depletion. I assume you're running
with AC power. I also assume this Ext.HD is USB.

Of course, it's best if this is USB2, not USB1.x.

Question 1 - I just want to have an entire backup if my computer
crashes
or
is even stolen (assume the external hd with backup is kept in another
location). Is this a truly workable utility to be able to do that?

Yeah, but...

With what you've described you will not be able to rest-
ore the entire OS upon a failure/theft/etc. Although I've
not experimented with this, you'll need something called
an (A)utomated (S)ystem (R)ecovery image.

Based on what I read, and you can see by review of the
Backup help documents on the topic of ASR, this seems
to be a bootable stub that you store away until needed.

When the time comes, it sounds like you'd boot this ASR
image and use the minimal system to restore components
from your periodic backup. Perhaps someone else can
elaborate/correct my assumptions here. Unfortunately,
again referring to the ASR documentation, a 1.44mb
FD will be required for the ASR image recording. I due
recall playing with this once, but I don't have that drive.

It seems that a CD/DVD could be substituded for this
drive requirement, but I don't recall the experimentation
experience. It seems like, as I recall, it really means a
1.44mb diskette - no exceptions.

Of course, my plans regarding any restore needs would
be precluded by an entire system reload using shipped
distribution media. Then, user data would be restored
from there. Of course, I will lose any/all updates applied,
but those can be re-applied.

Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do
a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files. I know I
should
use
what they call an 'incremental' backup, but I don't understand if I
will
backup to the SAME file name I used for this first backup (eg.
"Everything.bkf") or if I will backup to a NEW backup file name? I
could
understand if it was the SAME file - and it would only replace/update
the
changed files and also add the new ones. But if I'm supposed to create
a
NEW
file, I am confused on how anyone could perform an efficient restore
operation from what would end up being many, many '.bfk' files (having
multiple versions of the same backed up [but modified since] files).

The subsequent backup(s) always point to the initial bac-
kup(*.bkf) file for the incremental backup. I run this inc-
remental backup for a week, beginning the new week
with an overlay(normal) backup. My reason for this is:

If you've completed 6 incremental backups, and then just
simulate a restore to look at the .bkf structure, you'll see:

There will be 6 distinct images for your full backup target.
The first image will be the base image, containing your
complete backup target. The other 5 will contain comp-
lete directory images of your backup target but, only the
members changed will be included in the respective dir-
ectories. So, if you want to fully restore 1 complete dir-
ectory, you really should restore image #1, followed by
#2, #3,.... #6, in that order. Of course, if you know the
data, and what you're looking for, you could just restore
#3, or #5. But, depending on the member update activity,
#4 might be the last backup to contain the member that
you are/were looking for. If you merely continue to run
daily incrementals for say - 100 days, you're gonna' have
100 full path incrementals to look through to find the last
version of a specific member you might be tracking.

Using this structure has the benefit of both incremental
backup, and versioning. A single member may have ch-
anged on every day of your daily backups, and you'd
have 6 copies of that member. Each in various stage of
change. If the incremental was simply a member overlay
based on change activity, you'd have no versioning
recovery path.

With the backup execution, a text document log entry is
created to record the details of the backup. These log
entries are placed in an "ntbackup" directory in a 10
entry rotation. When the 11th backup rolls out, the 1st
backup log gets overwritten.

One other possibly important issue is that if you choose
to restore a single member/directory/etc. unless you
specify "single folder" mapping, the entire path get re-
built. This means that all the higher lever "empty" direct-
ories will be part of the restore package.

Question 3 - BONUS question Does anybody know what will happen if I
hit
the cancel button now that I've started this backup? (You can assume I
use
the backup type that clears the Archive checkbox attributes).
Specifically,
will what has already backed up be good and can I later continue with
the
rest of the backup? This has alot to do with Question 2 since if maybe
if
I
just backup to the same backup file name as an 'incremental' backup, it
would
seem I'd be good to continue the backup?

I really don't know the answer to that, but I really don't
think backup interacts much/any with archive. IOW, I
don't think the archive setting carries any weight in the
backup operation. I think the backup is driven only by
the specified target, mitigated by any update activity.



Thanks,



Gary

Thanks for helping me.

 

[Rock]

I started a 'backup the entire computer' operation on my laptop to an
external hard drive. It's clicking away and now I'm not so sure this was a
great idea (for one thing, I have 36 gigs of data on the entire computer
and
I have to wonder if all this churning might do in my computer before it's
even 'safely' backed up

Question 1 - I just want to have an entire backup if my computer crashes
or
is even stolen (assume the external hd with backup is kept in another
location). Is this a truly workable utility to be able to do that?

Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files. I know I should
use
what they call an 'incremental' backup, but I don't understand if I will
backup to the SAME file name I used for this first backup (eg.
"Everything.bkf") or if I will backup to a NEW backup file name? I could
understand if it was the SAME file - and it would only replace/update the
changed files and also add the new ones. But if I'm supposed to create a
NEW
file, I am confused on how anyone could perform an efficient restore
operation from what would end up being many, many '.bfk' files (having
multiple versions of the same backed up [but modified since] files).

Question 3 - BONUS question Does anybody know what will happen if I hit
the cancel button now that I've started this backup? (You can assume I use
the backup type that clears the Archive checkbox attributes).
Specifically,
will what has already backed up be good and can I later continue with the
rest of the backup? This has alot to do with Question 2 since if maybe if
I
just backup to the same backup file name as an 'incremental' backup, it
would
seem I'd be good to continue the backup?

I recommend using a drive imaging program rather than ntbackup. These
programs create a compressed image of the drive on the USB external drive.
Restores can be done on a drive, volume or file basis. Some will also do
individual file backup. Programs of this type are Acronis True Image 10
which seems to be popular at the moment, Norton Ghost, and Terabyte
Unlimited Image for Windows.

I believe investing in a drive imaging program, testing it to see how it
works, and test to make sure it will restore your system when you need it,
is one of the best investments you can make.