incremental backups as separate files

[ukiahN]

When backing up a volume or volumes to a file on a HD, you should have the option to save the incremental backup as a *separate file*, rather than simply modifying/expanding the existing (enormous) file. I would use this software if I could do that. Because I can't do that, I can't use this software. This is because i want to backup my folders to a file on a separate drive, and occasionally copy those backups to CD-R media. The way it works now, to put one of these backup files onto CD-Rs you have to copy the whole darn thing - using a file splitter such as HJsplit to break it ino 640mb chunks if its larger than 640mb. If you could simply save each backup snapshot and the associated changed files as a new file, you could simply copy those new files periodically to CD-Rs using standard burning software.

 

 

 

Furthermore, I should be able to choose to break the backup file into segments of a specified size (i,e, 640mb, 100mb, 1.4mb, and so on), instead of having to use a third pary utility to do so. This would increase convenience and data securty, as one large file is more vulnerable to data loss than many small files.

 

 

 

Another advantage to these options would be for users who want to keep their backups on CD-Rs but don't always have a CD-R connected to their computer. they could temporarily keep the (640mb split, incrementalized) backup files on their HD until they can move them over to CDs.

 

 

 

basically, the more options the better, as everyone savvy user has his/her own specific needs and styles of working with their data.

 

 

 

if you ever make this change, let me know and i might purchase this software!

 

-UN

[lv2ski]

You had mentioned "This is because I want to backup my folders to a file on a separate drive, and occasionally copy those backups to CD-R media."

 

You can do this with Retrospect. The best way would be to backup your specific folders to their own Backupset. Then you can burn that backupset to your CD-Rs.

 

 

 

As for the suggestion about being allowed to break up the backup file into segments of a specific size - this is a good suggestion. It is on our suggestion list.

[gaige]

One additional request for this. I am looking for this feature because of a peculiar timing issue that I'd like to resolve. On my Mac's I have a very fast tape drive, and due to capacity requirements, we're planning on upgrading to an even faster one. Right now, Retrospect running on a G4/733 can't keep up with the tape drive when I'm backing up over the network to certain machines (unfortunately machines with large data stores), this causes unnecessary wear and tear on the tape drive due to having to slow down, or worse, stop and rewind.

 

 

 

The solution that we've thought of is: put a very large hard drive on the machine and then back up everything on the network to the hard drive, and then do a local backup of this hard drive to the tape drive.

 

 

 

The problem is, as you I'm certain have already figured out, that if you do this, the backup set on tape grows very large, very fast, because all incremental data is stored in the same file and creates a yet-larger file to be backed up the next day.

 

 

 

Now, our twisted minds here have come up with a work-arund that we have not yet dared to try, but it looks like it would work. The Macintosh version is capable of doing a backup to "the internet" which stuffs all of the data into a large cluster of "reasonably sized" files (all about 16MB). So, taking advantage of the Unix nature of OS X, I've theorized that I could use 127.0.0.1 (loopback address) to back up the files to an FTP server on the same machine as I am backing up, and use that set for all of my clients. Then, use a local backup script to back up those local files to the tape drive.

 

 

 

Of course, there are a few problems with this:

 

1) a lot more work than necessary is done by the server mac because it needs to be an FTP server and a Retrospect server at the same time. Likely the network backup speeds would decrease further.

 

2) Doing restores from a catastropic backup server failure as well as a client failure or doing historical data recovery is a huge pain in the neck, because you need to recover the entire FTP site in order to then run retrospect to the FTP server and do the recovery.

 

 

 

However, in the case of restores to "time-local" files where the backup server is intact, it has the added benefit of not having to deal with (usually slower) tape drives.

 

 

 

So, if you folks added the feature to do file-incremental backups (in exactly the same way as FTP as far as I'm concerned, I don't mind backing up 16MB minimum every day), then I could do this without using FTP.

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

-Gaige

 

 

[jshelton]

You could use Retrospect to clone the files from your source machines onto the designated backup server. (Use the Duplicate capability.) Then backup the server to tape.

 

 

 

=John=

 

 

[gaige]

That's true, but it means that I have to keep synchronized copies of all files of all machines on one (or more) huge volumes attached to my server. It would also be questionable as to whteher it would handle duplicate files correctly, since the paths would be different.

 

 

 

-Gaige

 

 

[herrmann]

The software I am still looking for: (intelligent incremental backup + CDR strip set + readable on ordinary CD-drives (CD-ROM))

 

Reply to “ The best way would be to backup your specific folders to their own Backupset. Then you can burn that backupset to your CD-Rs.”: I have the same problem as the original author and I think this suggested solution is no reasonable way. The sense of incremental backup is to decrease the amount of Diskspace and usertime in burning CDs etc. With the suggested way I have to burn the whole backupset=file every time when it has changed. But for this job, I just need “ExplorerCopy” instead of Retrospective because the effect is the same: Huge amount of data each time you backup and save it to CDR. Which means wasting time and money by burning mostly same file on different CDs.. All intelligence of intelligent incremental backup lost!

 

The built-in feature CD-strip-set does not help me very much further on because I have to use my backup CDR strip set not only on computers with CDRs, I also have to recover the CDR data on emergency-PCs that have just CD-drives. The same problem for my second purpose of the backup CDR strip set: use it as a take-with-data-set, to be used also on Computers with no CDR but only CD.

 

In addition, using one large file seems to me a horribly dangerous saving and burning method..

 

Good idea, the intelligent incremental backup – please incorporate CDR strip set + readability on ordinary CD-drives or workaround next time and tell me about it or tell me about other software featuring both.

 

Thank you