have a FULL DRIVE BACKUP on an external hard drive that you can restore-mouser (October 14, 2012, 11:37 AM)
How many levels of old backups is it recommended to keep?
Partition level back tools are somewhat unreliable-NigelH (October 14, 2012, 02:46 PM)
- even if they offer file level recovery from their image backups.
Why would they want to offer file level recovery from a partition image?-40hz (October 14, 2012, 05:35 PM)
One of the things I like about Paragon is that you can 'mount' the images as read only drives and recover individual files and folders using normal Explorer methods. This can be handy - but I take your point that file backups are best done with appropriate tools.-Carol Haynes (October 14, 2012, 06:10 PM)
I used to like that feature in Acronis but have given up using their bloated bugfest sometime ago when they caused me a lot of embarrassment with clients having recommended their tools.-Carol Haynes (October 14, 2012, 06:10 PM)
By the way if you rely on Windows 7 backup for imaging I discovered it no longer works on 3Tb drives (or any drive that has a 4mb block size). Seems Windows backup is optimise for 512kb block size.Wouldn't that be 4kb and 512byte sectors? Interesting if that's preventing a backup utility from working.-Carol Haynes (October 14, 2012, 02:30 PM)
Also, mouser, why specifically recommend image-based backups?
Beside Acronis TrueImage's problems a while ago, is there another one you had in mind?Acronis was a case in point. But we're talking about relying on the integrity of a single multi-gigabyte file. I suspect many 100s of gigabytes for many people.-40hz (October 14, 2012, 05:35 PM)
Extracting individual files from an image sounds like a good way to risk damaging the integrity of the image.This was answered by Carol, but your question surprised me seeing that extraction is referring to just reading data from an image file.-40hz (October 14, 2012, 05:35 PM)
Wouldn't that be 4kb and 512byte sectors? Interesting if that's preventing a backup utility from working.-f0dder (October 14, 2012, 07:05 PM)
why specifically recommend image-based backups?
The big question is 'do you trust the software to produce faultless images'.
In the case of Acronis I no longer do - I have seen too many failed backups, too many images fail to validate.-Carol Haynes (October 15, 2012, 03:03 AM)
Experience so far with Paragon has been good - plus it has the option of backing up offline (using the Windows based recovery disk) if you do come across online issues (which I haven't).Do they still have the offline feature? I received a mail a while ago wrt. Paragon Virtualization Manager, that due to Micrsoft sumfinsumfin they would no longer be able to offer the WinPE based rescue disks :/-Carol Haynes (October 15, 2012, 03:03 AM)
The biggest issue with image files AFAICS is, assuming they are produced without error, the problem of a single bad block appearing on the hard disk rendering the whole image unusable. I have seen no mention from any of the major software houses on mitigation for this issue and when you are talking about images potentially in the 100s of Gb soor or later there is going to be a block error.You shouldn't have an entire image ruined because of a single sector error, as image compression is normally done in blocks rather than image-wide... but it will still affect a larger block than a single sector, which can obviously be disastrous (registry hivefiles, executable files, or some of your important damage). Plus, I dunno how restoration deals with these errors - ideally you should be able to let the restoration continue, but get a list of smashed-up files, but I wouldn't be surprised if most software goes "sorry, failed, bummer mate."-Carol Haynes (October 15, 2012, 03:03 AM)
http://support.kaspersky.com/viruses/rescuediskThanks for the link - trying to diagnose a friend's royally messed-up laptop... I'm wagering hardware fault, it's either that or some really nasty malware.
Free effective external scan, does wonders for cleanup of all sorts of evilware.-Stoic Joker (October 15, 2012, 06:42 AM)
You know what thing we need to add to our "kit" of tools recommended for dealing with data loss situations is: A second PC.
You know what thing we need to add to our "kit" of tools recommended for dealing with data loss situations is: A second PC.+1. And maybe a second router too. When my router failed, it was a pain to even order another one. Without Internet access, it's getting very hard to do anything with computers, from finding help to ordering parts.-mouser (October 15, 2012, 10:00 AM)
Thanks for the link - trying to diagnose a friend's royally messed-up laptop... I'm wagering hardware fault, it's either that or some really nasty malware.-f0dder (October 15, 2012, 12:15 PM)
I have versioned document backups running in real time, onto a separate hard drive mounted on my pc; I do this to protect myself from accidentally deleted a file i later realize i need, or making changes to a document that i realize i shouldn't have, etc. This has to run all the time.
Now this dual approach takes care of most of my WORRIES. However, I have recently forced myself to use an online backup system.-mouser (October 20, 2012, 03:57 PM)
ShadowExplorer
Since the Volume Shadow Copy Service is included, and turned on by default, in all editions of Windows Vista/7, why not take advantage of it? All it takes is an additional tool like ShadowExplorer, that can access the shadow storage and make the point-in-time copies accessible to the user.
Features
* Show available point-in-time copies
* Browse through Shadow Copies
* Retrieve versions of files and folders