Mirroring a drive as a backup

[JIM_BOB7813]

Currently I backup by copying my most useful data to DVDs (mydocs/desktop etc) but it occured to me that if my HDD does fail I will still have to go through the work of installing Windows, all other programs, customising them, setting email client etc so I thought it would be worth investing in another HDD and mirroring my current one to that so I could just swap them over in the event of HDD failure.

Which is the best way to do this? Buy another oem drive (320gb 7200.10) and use something like True Image? Does WinXP Pro have HDD cloning software? Could I use Linux (dd?)?

Thanks

[peterb]

dd would work. I have used a program called caspar to clone disks (but only under win 2k - the version I have supports XP) Welcome to Future Systems Solutions

Others have used Norton ghost. True image looks as if it would do the job, although I haven't used it myself. Basically anything that does a bit map copy should work.

[staffsMike]

Most efficient way to do it is having a RAID 1 setup.

Norton Ghost, true image etc.. are fine as long as you don't have too much stuff on the hard drive already.

[s3ds]

Most efficient way to do it is having a RAID 1 setup.

Norton Ghost, true image etc.. are fine as long as you don't have too much stuff on the hard drive already.

yes this it what i do on two pc's that run 24/7 it is unlikley for both drives to die at the same time.
if one drive dies you replace it and rebuild the mirror ( i have not had to do this yet but i use WD Raid drives that are designed for 24/7 use )
The sofware i use for work makes big files that some times dont fit on cd so i have even taken to back up to a drive in a removable rack using mirroring software with CRC checking
as for software i have used norton ghost and found it worked ( mainly for swapping drives )

[peterb]

RAID is not a substitute for backing up the data - it is really best suited where you want reliable continuity of uptime - not a backup strategy!

[staffsMike]

It's certainly not the only method of backup I would use but it's a very handy thing to have if your main drive dies.

[s3ds]

ViceVersa Software: File Synchronization, File Replication, Windows Backup Software viceversa pro is the backup software i use

[JIM_BOB7813]

Thanks for the replies. I remembered a while ago Seagate released a free version of True Image called DiscWizard but it won't run saying I don't have a seagate/maxtor drive installed, which I do.

The FAQ says Discwizard won't work with SCSI drives. My PC sees my drive as a SATA SCSI device so I think that's why it isnt working :/

[Saracen]

yes this it what i do on two pc's that run 24/7 it is unlikley for both drives to die at the same time.

It's not that unlikely, and I've had it happen to me, and to more than one client.

Some mains problems will damage both drives. PSU failures can damage both drives. If your RAID controller goes down, you may well have problems getting a new one to recognise the existing array, or a controller failure can kill multiple drives. And there are any number of OS corruptions that, when written to disk, will be faithfully mirrored.

If the data is stuff that's replaceable, that's one thing. But if it's important, then I seriously recommend you don't treat a RAID mirror as an substitute for a backup, because no IT manager in his right mind would do so for company data.

RAID is about resilience, and keeping users online, and yes, it will often protect against data loss from hard drive failure, but it absolutely is not a substitute for a backup if the data is stuff you can't afford to lose.

For instance, I work for myself. It would be a major expense if I lost my accounts system, and as I have a legal obligation to maintain some records, not to mention submit VAT and IR returns, I can't just shrug my shoulders if I lose records. I'd have to recreate the records, from primary records, and it's take days if not weeks to do it. That's the kind of data I won't entrust to RAID. And the RAID I use isn't a simple mirror, but a 6-disk Ultra-SCSI RAID5 array running on a dedicated hardware controller .... with two spare controllers and several spare drives, including a hot spare in that array.


Backup is all about assessment of risk, assessment of the cost in the event of loss, and the cost of alternatives to protect against that loss.

RAID is fine as a tool against loss, and especially against downtime, but it isn't (IMHO) a substitute for backups, especially if the data is important.

An external drive, or perhaps better yet, an internal drive and a disk caddy (so the drive can be physically removed when not in use(, together with TrueImage or Ghost, makes a decent and cost-effective backup. I'd recommend, personally, using two drives in the caddy, though, and alternating.

[acrobat]

You can do it a cheap and simple way and just do it yourself. Thats what I do.

I have two drives, and every couple of days, I just copy n paste my important folders from one disk to the other. Theres only about 4 folders, so I open windows explorer, click on drive C and browse it using the right hand page. Then I can select all 4 folders, control c, click drive d, control v, job done. Takes a while to copy but I just make a brew while its copying across. You can also even make a batch file which will do it for you.

You can also automate that exact same process - for free (by using various shareware/freeware backup tools, or even macromaker). And windows has a backup utility which can do the same thing, although I've never bothered using it because I'm happy with my simple method and I rather it not backup my data when it doesn't need to (like when I haven't done any work for a few days.)

[JIM_BOB7813]

acrobat your method appears to be the same as what I do with DVDs, just copy/paste all important documents. What i'd like to have is a complete mirror of my current drive including the OS and all data so that the drive will be bootable.

[peterb]

It's certainly not the only method of backup I would use but it's a very handy thing to have if your main drive drives.

It is only handy if one of the drive fails - if the raid is damaged it is no good, and if the operating system corrupts the array (as the array is one logical drive) both physical drives will contain the same corrupted data (a problem I am fixing on anothere machine as I type!!)

[staffsMike]

I've fortunatly never experienced these faliures but I am of course aware of them.

I regularly do backup's to 3 different media types

[JIM_BOB7813]

I've fortunatly never experienced these faliures but I am of course aware of them.

I regularly do backup's to 3 different media types

Do you just copy all your useful data or clone the drive?

[Saracen]

Do you just copy all your useful data or clone the drive?

Personally, I do a mix of both.

I put different content on different drives. The OS goes on one, and I have TrueImage images of it. Apps go on a second, and I take a regular image of that.

Data is split between important and less important stuff. The less important stuff is held as a master copy on the RAID system in a server, and a locally-held mirror on relevant PCs, and is synchronised to the master regularly. The master is imaged periodically.

The important data, such as accounts and client data, is held on the server in a different logical drive from other stuff, and accessed from there. It's imaged regularly with TrueImage, but I also have an SLR tape drive on the server, with daily backups in a grandfather-father-son rotation scheme. Finally, the TrueImage images are encrypted and FTP'ed to a remote server, so if the very worst happens, I can get a new PC or two in a new building, install the OS, install the apps and download that FTP image and restore.

I find that by breaking stuff down into logical drives, you can treat different aspects of data with different priorities, according to importance. If, for instance, I had MP3 versions of my CDs on the machine (and I don't, by the way), it wouldn't bother me if I lost them since I could always recreate them over a period of time. But it helps to keep important data physically separate from less important stuff, minimising that which needs regular and frequent backups, and keeping the size of backups that need to be stored on optical disc and/or FTPd manageable.

For many people, aspects of this would probably be overkill, but it suits me and I came close to a catastrophe a few years ago because I lost several hard drives in one machine AND the DVD-RAM drive the backup was on. I had the backups, but it took some effort (and cost) to locate a DVD-RAM drive to read them, and the time delay in that put me in a very awkward spot with clients.

All told, there's a large number of ways of approaching this, and what suits one person won't suit another. It's all a question of balance.

[acrobat]

acrobat your method appears to be the same as what I do with DVDs, just copy/paste all important documents. What i'd like to have is a complete mirror of my current drive including the OS and all data so that the drive will be bootable.

Ahh, that needs either raid or proper clone/mirror software then. You should be able to buy stuff pretty cheap to do that though. You can actually get software to do it for free, but I don't know anything about those, and I probably would rather pay for a well known one. (Its not that expensive).

Theres actually an old(ish) thread on this forum where people talked about different types.

http://forums.hexus.net/operating-sy...-software.html

The only one I've ever used was called Norton Ghost. It seemed good. I only used it briefly though because I don't like to clone my own OS, because usually, after several months of usage... my OS gets gradually bogged down. I take really good care of my OS's, and I don't install any toolbars or themes or mini apps any rubbish like that. But they always still eventually get bogged down.. Things like installing a game thats uninstall doesn't work, and I end up having to deleting it manually which leaves stuff in the registry etc.. So basically, I like to keep my data backed up, but do a fresh OS install every few years (or less).