Yet another backup problem

[Guest]

The problem with most sync programs is lack of imagination.

Suppose you wish to sync 2 folders with several sub-folders inside. The
sync program notices that there is a subfolder in the master that is not in
the slave, and copies the new subfolder into the slave. Unfortunately, what
the program does not notice is that the new folder is identical to the one
on the master with the exception of the name; I fixed a typo.

e.g. SymphonyNo.5 is changed to Symphony No.5. Inside, Alegro con brio is
changed to Allegro con brio.

In this case, a new copy of the symphony is loaded into the slave, and the
first movement is duplicated like this:

01-Alegro con brio
01-Allegro con brio

The files are identical except for the additional 'l' in the title.

Here's another example: Suppose I change the Symphony No.5 from 128kb/s CBR
to 128kb/s, maximum, with VBR. I would want this change to carry through to
the slave, even though the title is identical.

How would I handle this problem?

Norm Strong

 

[Guest]

I guess this is one of the reasons techs at microsoft preffer to use file
transfer wizard as a backup,you can easily edit what to backup...Plus
if xp is corrupted,why fix it,just reinstall it,then run FTW from a cd.

 

[CWatters]

How would I handle this problem?

Get a big disk and do nightly full image backups rather than incrementals?

 

[Shank]

Syncback www.2brightsparks.com gives you full control over sync/backup
by file date/size/name etc. It also syncs both ways, adding and deleting
as needs be to ensure that both directory structures are identical.

Sync programs can only do so much. It is still up to the operator to
keep the origin in order.

Rob

 

[POP]

In

The problem with most sync programs is lack of imagination.


Suppose you wish to sync 2 folders with several sub-folders
inside. The sync program notices that there is a subfolder in
the master that
is not in the slave, and copies the new subfolder into the
slave. Unfortunately, what the program does not notice is that
the new
folder is identical to the one on the master with the exception
of
the name; I fixed a typo.
e.g. SymphonyNo.5 is changed to Symphony No.5. Inside, Alegro
con
brio is changed to Allegro con brio.

In this case, a new copy of the symphony is loaded into the
slave,
and the first movement is duplicated like this:

01-Alegro con brio
01-Allegro con brio

The files are identical except for the additional 'l' in the
title.

Here's another example: Suppose I change the Symphony No.5
from
128kb/s CBR to 128kb/s, maximum, with VBR. I would want this
change
to carry through to the slave, even though the title is
identical.

How would I handle this problem?

Norm Strong

IMO it's unreasonable in most cases to be able to rely on that.
It means that ther would be some pretty interesting problems
whenever similarly spelled words came about; how would the
program know if the differently spelled words meant the same
thing or something entirely different?
It -could- be done, and is in some programs, but such programs
are much more complex and run a lot slower due to the large
increase in work hat a program ahs to do.

I'm much rather have the cheap & dirty progs the way they work
now; it's up to me any my spellcheckers to spill thinsg currectly
most of de time.

REgards,

Pop

 

[CWatters]

The problem with most sync programs is lack of imagination.

Suppose you wish to sync 2 folders with several sub-folders inside. The
sync program notices that there is a subfolder in the master that is not in
the slave, and copies the new subfolder into the slave. Unfortunately, what
the program does not notice is that the new folder is identical to the one
on the master with the exception of the name; I fixed a typo.

How could any program ever know if the new folder was simply a rename or an
intentional copy? Would you want it to prompt you every time it finds a
similar folder structure on two parts of the disc? How would you define
similar?

 

[Guest]

This is the conclusion I've come to. What I'm going to do is keep track of
the "Date modified" If it's more recent than the last time I backed the
file up, I'll replace it completely; otherwise not.

Thanks,

Norm
Strong

 

[Pappion]

I don't understand what's happened to the CD programs. I used to be able
to put in a CDRW and drag a folder to it, and it would not re-copy a
folder already on it, nor a file. When did all of that disappear? That
is the easiest way to backup, IMHO. But, I'm not a tech.


This is the conclusion I've come to. What I'm going to do is keep track
of
the "Date modified" If it's more recent than the last time I backed the
file up, I'll replace it completely; otherwise not.

Thanks,

Norm
Strong

 

[gls858]

This is the conclusion I've come to. What I'm going to do is keep track of
the "Date modified" If it's more recent than the last time I backed the
file up, I'll replace it completely; otherwise not.

Thanks,

Norm
Strong

I use a program that does exactly that. It's made by a company
called Lockstep. I use the workgroup version but there's a single
user version also. It takes a baseline backup the first time you run
it and stores it on an separate drive.
I use external USB drives. It keeps up to 25 versions of each file.
You can restore any version and there's also a disaster recovery option.
In case your interested:

http://www.backup-for-one.com/index.html

gls858