Backup Methods Using Second HDD?

[Dick K]

I run XP Home SP2 and I have a second internal HDD
which is intended purely for backup. I'd like to be
able to recover from a hopelessly corrupt or a
catastrophically failed master disk in as painless
a fashion as possible. Currently I clone the master disk
to the second drive (using Norton Ghost 2002 under
MS-DOS). I'm worried that in the event of a total master
drive failure the clone wouldn't be bootable, even if
rejumpered as master, because XP changes its Volume
ID from c:\ to d:\. Probably the same consideration would
apply if I cloned back to the master from the second
drive to overwrite a hopelessly corrupt disk, because
the "master" would acquire an ID of d:\.

Therefore I'd like to ask: Are my misgivings justified?
If they are, is there a better workaround than the only
one I can think of - disconnecting the second HDD after
cloning and before booting Windows (to stop the Volume ID
changing)? Can anyone recommend other ways of achieving
the objectives?

Thanks in advance for any helpful suggestions.

 

[R. McCarty]

I think you have the Right tools, but the process is maybe not
what you want. Instead of having D:\ as a replicated C: drive
just store your Ghost Image on D:. and continue to use the D:
drive for other uses (User Data, Multimedia). Keep perhaps 2
to 3 image sets (by Date). If C: becomes corrupted or fails,
you can install a new blank drive and restore the image from
the D: drive. Best to burn the Image set to CD-R or DVD-R
disks every 2-3 iterations. That way you've got your install
protected by being totally off magnetic media. In other words
don't clone C:->D:. Just create an Images Folder and then use
Ghost to Image C: to a dated sub-folder and split the images
so they'll fit on whatever burnable media your PC has.

 

[JerryMouse]

I run XP Home SP2 and I have a second internal HDD
which is intended purely for backup. I'd like to be
able to recover from a hopelessly corrupt or a
catastrophically failed master disk in as painless
a fashion as possible. Currently I clone the master disk
to the second drive (using Norton Ghost 2002 under
MS-DOS). I'm worried that in the event of a total master
drive failure the clone wouldn't be bootable, even if
rejumpered as master, because XP changes its Volume
ID from c:\ to d:\. Probably the same consideration would
apply if I cloned back to the master from the second
drive to overwrite a hopelessly corrupt disk, because
the "master" would acquire an ID of d:\.

Therefore I'd like to ask: Are my misgivings justified?
If they are, is there a better workaround than the only
one I can think of - disconnecting the second HDD after
cloning and before booting Windows (to stop the Volume ID
changing)? Can anyone recommend other ways of achieving
the objectives?

Thanks in advance for any helpful suggestions.

Think RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks). A RAID controller costs
piddly.

 

[Leythos]

Think RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks). A RAID controller costs
piddly.

There are two considerations for the type of backup the user wants:

1) A restorable file backup - Ghost can image a source drive to a single
file that can be stored on the backup drive that allows the user to
restore the image file (and resize partitions as needed) to a new drive.
This type of backup requires the source system to be taken down and booted
with the Ghost disk. This is not something that you really schedule and
it's always older than a standard file type backup.

2) Backups like NTBackup that allows the user to restore corrupt files,
like a tape backup (only to file) so that you can keep the last weeks
files available in case you corrupt one or more. These can be run nightly
and on-demand.

3) RAID 1 or RAID 5 - this should not be considered anything other than
HARDWARE backup. This type of method does not do anything in the case of
deleted or corrupted files, it's good in case a drive goes bad, you don't
lose any access to the working drive, but it does little to maintain files
in daily operation for recovery.

4) RAID and File backups - with a simple RAID-1 you get the benefit of
drive fault tolerance and with file backups you get the ability to recover
files that you delete or corrupt.

One thing to consider - when the backup drive is in the computer it almost
always ends up getting used for more than backups.

When I backup our servers in our office or my home I always do tape
backups for each business day. I also do file level backups and the like
to a folder on a drive marked BACKUPS. This lets me recover files without
needing to find the tape, but I only do one days backup to disk.

Now, since XP does not support RAID (soft raid) you need to purchase a
simple controller if your motherboard doesn't already have it - a Promise
TX2 or other controller does all the work on the card and makes setup and
management of RAID simple. I personally use the Promise SX6000 cards with
6 each of 250GB IDE drives for a working space of over 1TB using cheap
drives in a RAID 5 config - one nice thing about the SX is that they allow
HOT SWAPPING of all drives!

Hope this helps a little.

 

[Guest]

Not sure about ghost 2002,but xps own XCOPY will "ghost" or clone
youre 2nd drive to C:,then when set as master it will be C: drive,even
when cloned as D:.You could XCOPY the drive,then keep as running as
storage if you want,still running as slave to C:.To XCOPY simply set as
slave,formatted and with a primary partition,then go to run,type:
XCOPY C:\*.* D:\ /c/h/e/k/r

 

[Anna]

I run XP Home SP2 and I have a second internal HDD
which is intended purely for backup. I'd like to be
able to recover from a hopelessly corrupt or a
catastrophically failed master disk in as painless
a fashion as possible. Currently I clone the master disk
to the second drive (using Norton Ghost 2002 under
MS-DOS). I'm worried that in the event of a total master
drive failure the clone wouldn't be bootable, even if
rejumpered as master, because XP changes its Volume
ID from c:\ to d:\. Probably the same consideration would
apply if I cloned back to the master from the second
drive to overwrite a hopelessly corrupt disk, because
the "master" would acquire an ID of d:\.

Therefore I'd like to ask: Are my misgivings justified?
If they are, is there a better workaround than the only
one I can think of - disconnecting the second HDD after
cloning and before booting Windows (to stop the Volume ID
changing)? Can anyone recommend other ways of achieving
the objectives?

Thanks in advance for any helpful suggestions.

Dick:
First of all, and this is vitally important, upgrade your Ghost 2002 to the
Ghost 2003 version. And when you do, if that version is not the latest
build, i.e., Ghost 2003.793 use Ghost's LiveUpdate feature to install that
latest build.

There were significant problems with the 2002 version, particularly as
related to XP's NTFS file system. Also, problems using that version with USB
external hard drives, as well as with SATA drives. If you haven't had any
problems, consider yourself lucky. But take my advice and upgrade to the
2003 version without delay.

I've used the 2003 version to clone various drives (both internal &
external) hundreds of times and found the program to be virtually flawless
in its operation. In nearly every case I use the Ghost bootable floppy or
bootable CD to undertake the cloning operation. I prefer the simplicity and
portability of using those media rather than Ghost's Window's interface.
It's just a personal preference on my part.

Following cloning your source disk to the destination disk, Symantec prefers
that you boot to the cloned drive after the source disk has been temporarily
disconnected. They apparently believe that on this initial boot following
the cloning, there's a chance for some sort of file corruption when you boot
to the source disk with the cloned disk connected. Frankly, I've booted with
both drives connected after a cloning operation and I can't recall a single
problem I've ever had in this regard. But perhaps the potential is there.
Now I have to add that most of the time I'm working with removable
(internal) hard drives, so following a cloning operation it's a simple
matter for me to turn the source disk's mobile rack to the OFF position and
boot with the cloned drive to ensure that all is well, i.e., nothing
untoward occurred during the cloning operation. So I've not had a great deal
of experience cloning two internal drives.

Assuming your cloning went well, and there's little reason to think
otherwise, there will be no problem booting to the cloned internal drive.
(Needless to say if your source disk is defective in any way, corrupt system
files, etc., you'll just be copying the problem over to your destination
drive - if you clone garbage, garbage is what you'll get). And if you have
to clone back the contents of your destination disk to your original
day-to-day working drive for restoration purposes, there's no problem. This,
of course, assumes that the original drive is not defective mechanically or
electrically. The basic purpose of this cloning process is to maintain a
near-failsafe backup system and restore your original drive to its previous
functional state.

Working with two internal HDs as in your case, rather than removable drives,
makes the restoration a trifle more complicated. Your working drive is
configured/connected as Primary Master. You didn't say how your second drive
is configured. If it is configured as Secondary Master, then in most cases
that cloned drive will boot following your disconnecting the PM one. I say
"most cases" because many, if not most, reasonably current motherboards will
look for a bootable drive on either the Primary or Secondary Master
connection, i.e., if it doesn't find one on the PM it will look to the SM.
As a matter of fact many motherboards will look for a bootable HD
*regardless* of its position on the IDE data cable. So even a bootable HD
connected as a Slave may boot. There are, however, some motherboards that
will boot *only* to a drive connected as PM.

I'm not sure I quite understand your unease over some problem with the
disks' volume ids. I don't think it's anything to be concerned about in the
context of what we are discussing.

Seriously consider equipping your desktop computer with two removable
drives. The flexibility you get from this arrangement is enormous and you'll
never regret going this route.

Anna

 

[Dick K]

Thank you all for your helpful replies. I've
ordered Norton Ghost 2003 as a stopgap (at least
it will let me write image files to a NTFS disk,
which 2002 won't) and I'll consider where to go
from there.

Regards,

Dick K