Lee wrote:
Any suggestions on what backup software to use?
Although getting a bit off topic, it is interesting to read what others
are using...
I've been using Areca Backup <http://www.areca-backup.org/> for a couple
of years and quite like it. Basic setup should be fairly simple, but it
has a lot of flexibility, e.g. to, include a directory in the backup,
but exclude some specific directories below it, except some individual
files below those which do need to be included. Took me ages to find
something free (ideally open source, which Areca is) with that kind of
flexibility but still easy to use.
Having configured the backup job, it just takes a couple of clicks to
run it, or it can be scheduled e.g. with Windows' Task Manager or
Linux's cron. It supports doing full (include everything) and
incremental (include only what's changed since last time) backups, as
well as compression.
For recovery, you can easily restore everything or individual files or
folders either as they are in the latest backup or at any previous
backup point. Areca uses standard zip for compression and the directory
structure of the backups is reasonably understandable so, although it
would be a bit of a pain, it would be possible to manually recover a
backup if for some reason it wasn't possible to get Areca installed on
the new system.
Although I couldn't find it documented (so wouldn't like to rely too
heavily on it without thorough testing), Areca's incremental backups
even seem to deal with alternating media - it will back up everything
that's changed since the last backup on the current media, even if
you've backup up onto another disk in the meantime.
About the only downside I've found is that it requires Java.
I'm using unison to backup/sync multiple PCs. I just took a look at
the latest version & the gui version looks to be a pain to setup, so
it's probably not a good recommendation. I remember futzing with it
for a while to get it "right".
The downside of simply synchronising a backup directory to another disc
/ PC is that there's no history. If you find that a file got corrupted a
few weeks ago, the copy in the backup will have been replaced with the
corrupt version as well. Of course, whatever meets your needs is fine,
and something else might be overkill for you; there are advantages and
disadvantages of every method, and everyone's needs are different.
The other method is xcopy - also not a great solution since it's got a
path [or name?] limit of something like 256 characters, so it _will_
miss stuff. I'm looking at robocopy as a replacement...
On the other hand, other than the removable drives, the cost is 0$
On 12/22/16, NFN Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
All good stuff. A couple of additional thoughts inserted...
same here
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
Some basic principles all users should follow for backup (I'm sure
you know this, but other readers may not):
I would go one step further -- think through your potential recovery
scenarios.
And think through your potential disaster scenarios. That
cryptolocker malware that encrypts all your data files is scary, so I
backup to removable media. What happens if the removable media is
lost/stolen? Truecrypt to the rescue :)
Don't forget the possibility that the likes of Cryptolocker could start
encrypting the backup volume while it's mounted. Removing it removable
reduces the opportunity for damage going unnoticed, but doesn't
completely prevent it.
I haven't figured out a solution to that one, other than using some form
of cloud storage which, apart from the cost, isn't particularly
practical over my connection.
There's enough variants that one particular backup
methodology or tool may not fit all the possibilities for recovery.
There's a difference between doing a bare-metal recovery following a
device or controller failure and a recovery from an "oops" overwrite or
deletion of one or two critical files.
Maybe I've been lucky, but in personal use I've had only one disk
failure. Keeping install CDs + downloaded install programs + data
files was enough to restore everything to the new hard drive. Altho
it took~2-3 days from getting the new disk to a fully usable PC.
That's what I tend to do - back up data, and reinstall the system if
everything fails (had to do that a couple of months ago for the first
time in about 9 years). But for those relying on their PC for their
work, particularly if self-employed, 2-3 days downtime could be
catastrophic and a full-disk image allows the whole system to be
recovered. On the other hand, the disk image may not restore easily to a
different machine if the whole system fails, since it will include
drivers and configuration for the old system which might not be
appropriate for the new. Also the backups will be larger, it may be more
difficult to pull individual files out of the backup.
As I said earlier - different people have different needs. And as Smith
pointed out, a single tool might not even meet all one person's needs.
--
Mark.
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
