If not Dantz.....???

[Louise]

I have been running two backup systems.

On one I'm using Ghost and doing a full emage every two weeks. I a able
to keep three full images on the disk.

My daily backup has been using Dantz Retrospect Professional, also to an
external drive. Dantz seems to choke at the end of the operation,
building a snapshot with 3 or 4 or 5 files left to go.....and it can sit
there for hours.

The Dantz log says
File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_6b0.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)
or

File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_49c.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)

Any ideas about repairing this? And if not...

If I'm using an imaging program for one type of backup (Ghost), what
would be an alternative to Dantz for my second type of backup?

TIA

Louise

 

[Rod Speed]

I have been running two backup systems.

On one I'm using Ghost and doing a full emage every two weeks. I a able
to keep three full images on the disk.

My daily backup has been using Dantz Retrospect Professional, also to an
external drive. Dantz seems to choke at the end of the operation,
building a snapshot with 3 or 4 or 5 files left to go.....and it can sit
there for hours.

The Dantz log says
File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_6b0.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)
or

File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_49c.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)

Any ideas about repairing this? And if not...

If I'm using an imaging program for one type of backup (Ghost),
what would be an alternative to Dantz for my second type of backup?

One obvious alternative is the standard backup if you're using
one of the NT/2K/XP family for an OS. Its perfectly usable.

 

[Peter]

The Dantz log says

File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_6b0.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)
or

File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_49c.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)

Any ideas about repairing this? And if not...

Just exclude "C:\WINDOWS\Temp" from Retrospect backup.
(You should focus on backing up data rather than OS).

 

[Lady Margaret Thatcher]

Just exclude "C:\WINDOWS\Temp" from Retrospect backup.
(You should focus on backing up data rather than OS).

Peter, Are you also a Dantz user? What do you think of Retrospect
7.0?

 

[Lady Margaret Thatcher]

I have been running two backup systems.

On one I'm using Ghost and doing a full emage every two weeks. I a able
to keep three full images on the disk.

My daily backup has been using Dantz Retrospect Professional, also to an
external drive. Dantz seems to choke at the end of the operation,
building a snapshot with 3 or 4 or 5 files left to go.....and it can sit
there for hours.

The Dantz log says
File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_6b0.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)
or

File "C:\WINDOWS\Temp\Perflib_Perfdata_49c.dat": can't read, error -1020
(sharing violation)

Any ideas about repairing this? And if not...

If I'm using an imaging program for one type of backup (Ghost), what
would be an alternative to Dantz for my second type of backup?

If Peter's reply to your posting doesn't solve your problem, I suggest
that you post a question on the Dantz support forums. The company has
people who respond to all the posts there. It's one of the best
support forums I've seen.

About alternatives. Depends what you're looking for. I used to use
BackUp My PC, back when Seagate and then Veritas sold the product, and
I wasn't that happy with it. BUMP is easy enough to use, probably
easier than Dantz, but it has less functionalty and some annoying
limitations. The one that bothered me the most was that the catalog
file had an upper limit which I could easily hit after a few months of
backng up the four systems on my home LAN. After that, you just
couldn't do more backups. End of discussion. And, of course, no
error messages.

Dantz' incremental plus backup is more useful than the
incremental/changed since backup methods that BUMP uses. Also a lot
easier to do a restore.

No connection to Dantz. Just a (mostly) satisfied customer.

 

[Peter]

Peter, Are you also a Dantz user? What do you think of Retrospect

7.0?

I have used to run version 5.6. Don't know much about 7.0.

 

[Louise]

One obvious alternative is the standard backup if you're using
one of the NT/2K/XP family for an OS. Its perfectly usable.

True - I'm using XP Pro and I never think of using anything Microsoft -
but backup is...backup; and I can be pretty sure they'll be around

Louise

 

[Louise]

If Peter's reply to your posting doesn't solve your problem, I suggest
that you post a question on the Dantz support forums. The company has
people who respond to all the posts there. It's one of the best
support forums I've seen.

About alternatives. Depends what you're looking for. I used to use
BackUp My PC, back when Seagate and then Veritas sold the product, and
I wasn't that happy with it. BUMP is easy enough to use, probably
easier than Dantz, but it has less functionalty and some annoying
limitations. The one that bothered me the most was that the catalog
file had an upper limit which I could easily hit after a few months of
backng up the four systems on my home LAN. After that, you just
couldn't do more backups. End of discussion. And, of course, no
error messages.

Dantz' incremental plus backup is more useful than the
incremental/changed since backup methods that BUMP uses. Also a lot
easier to do a restore.

No connection to Dantz. Just a (mostly) satisfied customer.

Thanks - I didn't know they had a support forum. Until it started
choking a few months ago, I too was happy with Dantz - aside from it's
terribly confusing user interface.

But I will try Peter's suggestion first - I certainly don't need to
backup the temp file.

Louise

 

[Louise]

Just exclude "C:\WINDOWS\Temp" from Retrospect backup.
(You should focus on backing up data rather than OS).

I'm a little embarrassed, but you've opened up a whole new world of the
possibilities lurking in Dantz. I'm betting that now that I know I can
exclude files, I'll find what needs to be excluded and all will be well
again.

Using the exclude and include, could I set up a second backup set to
backup data only? In other words, could I set it up to backup all my
data (which I would collect from all over the computer) and have those
folders and files be the only things included? I guess I would ideally
want to exclude everything and then start including all data files?

I want to do this because I live and work on the same premises. I need
off site backup and I'm using a friend's house. But it would be nice if
I didn't have to do a Ghost Image and then break it into 8 DVDR disks so
that I bring a copy to her for safe keeping. Buring 8 or 9 disks gets
too tedious to be done in a timely manner.

Would this be a reasonable use of this program

Louise

 

[Louise]

One obvious alternative is the standard backup if you're using
one of the NT/2K/XP family for an OS. Its perfectly usable.

I just set up a backup in MS XP Pro to only backup my data files (hope I
remembered them all....). It wont recognize my Plextor DVDRW, so I'm
backing up to my hard drive and then will copy that to a DVDRW - I can
live with that since this is only in case of an onsite disaster that
destroys everything.

But - will Microsoft Backup be able to remember what files I choose and
be able to just repeat the process when I tell it to - like every week?
I would have to think that I don't have to go through every file and
folder looking for data each time I want to do a data backup.

I ask because I didn't see anything where it asked if I wanted to save
it?

TIA

Louise

 

[Rod Speed]

I just set up a backup in MS XP Pro to only backup my data files (hope
I remembered them all....). It wont recognize my Plextor DVDRW, so
I'm backing up to my hard drive and then will copy that to a DVDRW -

There's some advantages with that approach anyway if you have the space.

I can live with that since this is only in case of
an onsite disaster that destroys everything.

But - will Microsoft Backup be able to remember what files I choose and
be able to just repeat the process when I tell it to - like every week?

It would be safer to backup everything that has
changed since the last image backup was done.

 

[Louise]

There's some advantages with that approach anyway if you have the space.



It would be safer to backup everything that has
changed since the last image backup was done.

If I backed up everything that had changed, would the backup program
limit itself to the folders and files I already chose and only backup
what has changed within the chosen ones? Or, would it back up
everything it never backed up?

Thanks again.

Louise

 

[Rod Speed]

If I backed up everything that had changed, would the backup
program limit itself to the folders and files I already chose and
only backup what has changed within the chosen ones?

That approach is dangerous, easy for forget about something that matters.

 

[Peter]

I'm a little embarrassed, but you've opened up a whole new world of the

possibilities lurking in Dantz. I'm betting that now that I know I can
exclude files, I'll find what needs to be excluded and all will be well
again.

Using the exclude and include, could I set up a second backup set to
backup data only? In other words, could I set it up to backup all my
data (which I would collect from all over the computer) and have those
folders and files be the only things included? I guess I would ideally
want to exclude everything and then start including all data files?

Second backup set for data only?
What would you put in the first backup set?
When you work with selectors, just modify "Include" section. It will
change from "including everything" to "include specified selections".
You would not need to touch "Exclude" section at all.

I want to do this because I live and work on the same premises. I need
off site backup and I'm using a friend's house. But it would be nice if
I didn't have to do a Ghost Image and then break it into 8 DVDR disks so
that I bring a copy to her for safe keeping. Buring 8 or 9 disks gets
too tedious to be done in a timely manner.

That is why repetitive tasks need to be automated. You can't
automate burning discs, unless you spend a lot on the robot.

People figured out that backing over network or to external disk
drives is cheaper. Tape system of at least mentioned capacity
(40GB) might be too expensive also.

I would not use Retrospect for rapid system recovery.
Ghost (or similar) combined with network/external disk,
seems to be the simplest to use.

 

[Louise]

Second backup set for data only?
What would you put in the first backup set?
When you work with selectors, just modify "Include" section. It will
change from "including everything" to "include specified selections".
You would not need to touch "Exclude" section at all.


That is why repetitive tasks need to be automated. You can't
automate burning discs, unless you spend a lot on the robot.

People figured out that backing over network or to external disk
drives is cheaper. Tape system of at least mentioned capacity
(40GB) might be too expensive also.

I would not use Retrospect for rapid system recovery.
Ghost (or similar) combined with network/external disk,
seems to be the simplest to use.

As I have been doing it, the "first" backup set is a full system backup
with nightly additions to changed files.

I use another external drive and do a full image with Ghost.

Periodically I've been having Ghost break that image down into DVDR
size on my hard drive. I then burn those and leave them at a friend's
house. But as my drive grows, I'm up to burning 10 DVDs and I just
don't do that often enough.

So I was looking for a way to just burn data to the disks I leave at her
house, hoping it would be 2 or 3 disks rather than 10. But I now
realize (at least I think), that Dantz won't let you take it's image,
break it into DVD size parts and write it to DVDs. Dantz 6 wont
recognize my external Plextor DVD burner. And for some reason, the
Dantz upgrade nearly brought down the system; they didn't know why
either and they gave me my money back.

I'm thinking the other poster's suggestion of using the built in windows
backup for this regular data update that goes to her house is the best
answer. Or, have two rotating external drives.....that does seem a
little excessive since they would only be needed in case of major fire
etc.

Louise

 

[Neil Maxwell]

That approach is dangerous, easy for forget about something that matters.

Agreed. I used to use this approach until I missed something that a
foolish program put in an unexpected place. Plus, multiple users use
several of my PCs, and it's just not possible to convince some of them
to put their data in repeatable locations.

Full image backups made this a non-issue for me.

 

[Rod Speed]

Agreed. I used to use this approach until I missed something
that a foolish program put in an unexpected place. Plus, multiple
users use several of my PCs, and it's just not possible to convince
some of them to put their data in repeatable locations.

And other less than obvious stuff like digital certificates,
important cookies, DUN connectoids, etc etc etc.

Full image backups made this a non-issue for me.

She's already doing full image backups, this is just a higher
frequency incremental backup on top of the full image backup.

Backing up what has changed since the full image backup
with a few obvious exclusions like the swap file and Internet
Temporary Files and Temp is the safest approach.

Another approach would be to use incremental image backup, but
thats not very mature technology currently and its safer to wait till
it matures for a while with something as important as backup.

 

[Louise]

And other less than obvious stuff like digital certificates,
important cookies, DUN connectoids, etc etc etc.


She's already doing full image backups, this is just a higher
frequency incremental backup on top of the full image backup.

Backing up what has changed since the full image backup
with a few obvious exclusions like the swap file and Internet
Temporary Files and Temp is the safest approach.

Another approach would be to use incremental image backup, but
thats not very mature technology currently and its safer to wait till
it matures for a while with something as important as backup.

Thanks for all your thoughts. I think I wont chance anything less than
a full image and/or incrementals thereof.

Louise