Would VSS be an option for either a Linux or Mac client of the server?  Just 
asking here.
 
Jon
 
> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 17:06:12 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] Wisdom of the crowds: Backup
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> 
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Matthew W. Ross
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Good Afternoon, all.
> >
> > After much frustration with Acronis, I have come to the realization that it 
> > cannot do what I want it to. We've had the product for a year, and have had 
> > marginal success making and pulling data from backups. I am resorting to 
> > standard Windows Backups now.
> >
> > So, I'm in the market. I would love to have the list's current 
> > recommendations (for and against) various backup products.
> >
> > Here is my single requirement:
> >
> >  * File level restore of a Window's file share - Our biggest need is when a 
> > teacher/student accidently deletes or writes over a file... and would like 
> > the copy form 3 days ago.
> >
> > The following are optional:
> >
> >  * VMware support - We are now running all of our servers from the VMware 
> > cluster, some of which are running linux.
> >
> >  * Macintosh file support - Acronis chokes on some Macintosh file names 
> > when doing a file-level backup, and I'd love something that is known to 
> > work with these.
> >
> >  * Mild costs - I'm not looking for a cheap solution, but I'll take one 
> > that's inexpensive.
> >
> >  * Ease of use - A backup solution should not require constant 
> > grooming/tending/clearing to work.
> >
> > All suggestions are appreciated.
> 
> How much data are you talking about, and how volatile is it?
> 
> Given your only requirement, and if  the data is not terribly
> volatile, and there isn't too much of it, I'd suggest dispensing with
> backups and relying on VSS.
> 
> If you want more than that, you might do just fine with a couple of
> multi-terabyte USB drives attached to the server and robocopy - again,
> depending on the size of your data, and your history requirements.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> 
                                          

Reply via email to