Re: XP Pro Backup Utility - Not Quite Getting it

That was extremely helpful Gary.
I spent ALOT of time reading up before my post (and not getting anywhere).
You gave me the overview and details I needed. Thanks!
--



"Gary Walker" wrote:


Well, I'm no expert in backup, but I do use it every day
in various flavors, and have used it for restore also....


"Nomad" <nomad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:C679271C-E681-4989-8E87-30EC68FCA67B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I started a 'backup the entire computer' operation on my laptop to an
external hard drive. It's clicking away and now I'm not so sure this was a
great idea (for one thing, I have 36 gigs of data on the entire computer
and
I have to wonder if all this churning might do in my computer before it's
even 'safely' backed up :P




I doubt that any harm is about to come to your laptop,
other than a battery depletion. I assume you're running
with AC power. I also assume this Ext.HD is USB.

Of course, it's best if this is USB2, not USB1.x.



Question 1 - I just want to have an entire backup if my computer crashes
or
is even stolen (assume the external hd with backup is kept in another
location). Is this a truly workable utility to be able to do that?




Yeah, but...

With what you've described you will not be able to rest-
ore the entire OS upon a failure/theft/etc. Although I've
not experimented with this, you'll need something called
an (A)utomated (S)ystem (R)ecovery image.

Based on what I read, and you can see by review of the
Backup help documents on the topic of ASR, this seems
to be a bootable stub that you store away until needed.

When the time comes, it sounds like you'd boot this ASR
image and use the minimal system to restore components
from your periodic backup. Perhaps someone else can
elaborate/correct my assumptions here. Unfortunately,
again referring to the ASR documentation, a 1.44mb
FD will be required for the ASR image recording. I due
recall playing with this once, but I don't have that drive.

It seems that a CD/DVD could be substituded for this
drive requirement, but I don't recall the experimentation
experience. It seems like, as I recall, it really means a
1.44mb diskette - no exceptions.

Of course, my plans regarding any restore needs would
be precluded by an entire system reload using shipped
distribution media. Then, user data would be restored
from there. Of course, I will lose any/all updates applied,
but those can be re-applied.



Question 2 - I don't understand how I go forward next time I want to do a
backup when my laptop by then has new and changed files. I know I should
use
what they call an 'incremental' backup, but I don't understand if I will
backup to the SAME file name I used for this first backup (eg.
"Everything.bkf") or if I will backup to a NEW backup file name? I could
understand if it was the SAME file - and it would only replace/update the
changed files and also add the new ones. But if I'm supposed to create a
NEW
file, I am confused on how anyone could perform an efficient restore
operation from what would end up being many, many '.bfk' files (having
multiple versions of the same backed up [but modified since] files).




The subsequent backup(s) always point to the initial bac-
kup(*.bkf) file for the incremental backup. I run this inc-
remental backup for a week, beginning the new week
with an overlay(normal) backup. My reason for this is:

If you've completed 6 incremental backups, and then just
simulate a restore to look at the .bkf structure, you'll see:

There will be 6 distinct images for your full backup target.
The first image will be the base image, containing your
complete backup target. The other 5 will contain comp-
lete directory images of your backup target but, only the
members changed will be included in the respective dir-
ectories. So, if you want to fully restore 1 complete dir-
ectory, you really should restore image #1, followed by
#2, #3,.... #6, in that order. Of course, if you know the
data, and what you're looking for, you could just restore
#3, or #5. But, depending on the member update activity,
#4 might be the last backup to contain the member that
you are/were looking for. If you merely continue to run
daily incrementals for say - 100 days, you're gonna' have
100 full path incrementals to look through to find the last
version of a specific member you might be tracking.

Using this structure has the benefit of both incremental
backup, and versioning. A single member may have ch-
anged on every day of your daily backups, and you'd
have 6 copies of that member. Each in various stage of
change. If the incremental was simply a member overlay
based on change activity, you'd have no versioning
recovery path.

With the backup execution, a text document log entry is
created to record the details of the backup. These log
entries are placed in an "ntbackup" directory in a 10
entry rotation. When the 11th backup rolls out, the 1st
backup log gets overwritten.

One other possibly important issue is that if you choose
to restore a single member/directory/etc. unless you
specify "single folder" mapping, the entire path get re-
built. This means that all the higher lever "empty" direct-
ories will be part of the restore package.



Question 3 - BONUS question :) Does anybody know what will happen if I hit
the cancel button now that I've started this backup? (You can assume I use
the backup type that clears the Archive checkbox attributes).
Specifically,
will what has already backed up be good and can I later continue with the
rest of the backup? This has alot to do with Question 2 since if maybe if
I
just backup to the same backup file name as an 'incremental' backup, it
would
seem I'd be good to continue the backup?




I really don't know the answer to that, but I really don't
think backup interacts much/any with archive. IOW, I
don't think the archive setting carries any weight in the
backup operation. I think the backup is driven only by
the specified target, mitigated by any update activity.



Thanks,



Gary



Thanks for helping me.




.