On Nov 9, 2008, at 12:21 PM, Al wrote:
> > To recap the storage requirement, our needs are modest, no massive > photo or video files. Our most valuable data is in genealogy and > narrative files which do not take much space. The iMac is holding > about 40 GB on the hard drive; the other machines, less. > > On Nov 8, 11:13 am, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> At 7:03 AM -0800 11/8/2008, Al wrote: >> >>> On Nov 7, 11:11 am, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>> The nature of the backup is such that you need lower level access >>>> than AFP provides. CCC supports this by creating an encrypted >>>> tunnel >>>> between the two Macs then running on each. I haven't tested it >>>> yet >>>> but am planning to. Check the CCC docs for details. (This is >>>> what >>>> Bill is talking about re Credentials in his reply). >> >> That means the thing CCC creates on the NAS volume is NOT bootable. >> It is a virtual disk image file (dmg) that can be used at a later >> time to create a bootable volume. This is because to access the >> volume on the NAS, CCC must use AFP - which brings us back to the >> original AFP problem. > > So, these two, separate replies mean that I may be able to do > everything I want with CCC going to one FireWire or bootable USB-2 > external drive. That is: > > (1) Set up a partition for each of four Macs with ethernet to make > bootable clones of all internal hard drives, taking entire contents. > (2) Set up space(s) for the Users folder of each internal hard drive > to take incremental, maybe daily, backups. A question here is whether > I need four more partitions, or can I use one partition with four > distinct target folders, one folder for each Mac? I'm certain that individual partitions for each system will work. Can't see any advantage in trying the 'all in one partition' method. JMHO > (3) One more partition to play with Time Machine until Apple fixes its > problems, and maybe I would replace the use of CCC in #(2) above. Probably O.K. BUT Time Machine IS NOT A BACKUP STRATEGY. Its useful in day to day recovery of semi-current 'missing data' BACKUPS need to be completely separable from the 'in use' system, and capable of being archived (stored) "Off-Site", to be usable AS BACKUPs. [Backup being the necessary information to 'get back to a usable operation' in case of DISASTER.] >> >>> What other backups would I need? >> >> Well, it's always a good idea to have multiple backups. My recommendation has always been at least 3 sets of 'backup media (floppies, tape cartridges, external hard disks, etc.)' Rotating the sets each time you do a Backup. [Reason being ---- Disaster happens. Obtain replacement hardware, restore from most recent BU ---- Bad backup --- diagnose problem, reach for backup #2, --- Still No Joy, (restoration method problems) -- BU damaged. reach for BU #3 --- STOP, at this point, find someone, (friend, Data Service, whatever) to make copies of the 'still untouched BU#3--- Then work with the copy. If you are still not having success, you can get another copy of BU#3, and try another method. Yeah, paranoia does have it's uses at times. >> What happens >> if you have a failure WHILE you're running the backup? At that >> point, you can end up with NO backup! > > We can continue making CDs and DVDs of Users folders to store at my > son's house. Good program --- don't let yourself stop this, just because it isn't all that convenient. > > If the above makes sense, going further into dreamland, I could get a > dual-drive system set up in RAID 1. One example: at Other World > Computing which works with FW and USB-2. > http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/usb/raid_1/Gmax > > Another example is the more expensive Drobo, which has more industrial > weight expansion, including the gigabit NAS option with DroboShare > that I could play with later. > > I don't think I need to use WiFi. Why bother with that if the above > thinking works? > > Lastly, is there any reason to consider SuperDuper instead of CCC? I've been quite happy with SuperDuper! -- That having been said, I think that either SuperDuper! OR CCC will work for you. Chuck D. > > Al Poulin > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
