Can retrospect be used to clone a HDD?

[Trel]

since retrospect runs through windows can it be used to make a clone of a HDD or can it not do the windows system files and the registry?

[awnews]

I wouldn't recommend it for that, even though Retro will copy/backup the registry & system files. If you jump thru enough hoops you may be able to come close (at least functionally) but it's not worth it. For literal cloning (exact copy, little effort) to another drive or a file, go with Norton Ghost or Drive Image (FYI Symantec recently bought PowerQuest, so I assume Ghost & DI will be combined or the later phased out).

[envano]

 

Hi,

 

I am surprised with your answer.

 

It IS precisely the purpose of Retrospect to be able to face a HDD disaster.

 

Everybody knows how much time is necessary (days) to install and make correct configuration of your laptop/desktop including OS, applications, utilities, etc.

 

Now, if you say Retrospect is not recommended for cloning, does it simply mean you cannot rely on this application to get all your configuration back, in case of HDD major failure (replacement needed) ?

 

Regards.

 

E.

[natew]

Hi

 

If you want a true clone of a disk then block level utilities like ghost are a good way to go. However if you want incremental backups, multiple restore points, media rotation, client backups etc. a file based solution like Retrospect is ideal.

 

Retrospect can certainly restore an entire drive and computer from scratch. It just boils down to how you want to run your backups.

 

Thanks

Nate @ Dantz

[envano]

 

Hi Nate,

 

Thanks for your quick answer.

 

I fully agree that IF cloning can be planned, a product like Ghost is ideal.

 

The point is that an HDD crash usually cannot be planned (it would be too easy, and Retrospect therefore not be necessary, Ghost would just be enough !).

 

So, if you confirm that Retrospect restores an EXACT copy of your system and files (including registry, settings, network and everything) after an unexpected major crash, it's all what we ask for.

 

Provided that backup be made regularly and consistently, needless to say...

 

Thanks for the attention.

 

E.

[natew]

Hi

 

You can use Retrospect to easily restore all of the items you mentioned as well as your data.

 

Simply put, after the restore you will never know you performed a restore. Everything will work exactly the way it did previously and all of your files will be exactly where they were originally. A 100% restore of the system, applcations and data.

 

I suggest downloading a trial version and giving it a shot. I think you will find Retrospect does what you are hoping for.

 

Nate

[awnews]

Just to be clear, your question involved making a *clone* of the HDD, not just a functionally equivalent copy. A clone copies *everything* (even boot sector stuff--in addition to the OS, some annoying programs put stuff here) and puts everything back at the same (relative) locations. Retrospect doesn't do all of this, as it restores the files without worrying about the locations on the disk. But it *can* allow you to recover from a HD disaster. The issue & difference is how you get from there to here and how exact you require the restore to be.

 

Also, using Retro to do the restore involves a multi-step process of booting from CD (assuming you use the Disaster Recover process) or another harddrive, reinstaling an OS, then doing a restore. If you *know* you're doing to clone a disk (backup or restore), the Ghost process is easier and more direct *but* is manual and won't run under Windows.

 

I use both products but take advantage of the *strengths* of each. I *clone* my harddrive to a file on another harddrive using Ghost. And then I use Retrospect to run nightly incremental backups, keeping backups of *everything* on my harddrive (OS, apps, utilities, data, registry, etc.). Doing a restore (which I've done a number of times, on different machines) involves *first* using Ghost to restore the cloned image from the saved file, and *then* using Retrospect to restore the latest (or intermediate) files onto that same restored drive.

[envano]

 

Thanks your detailed answers, both of you.

 

Kind regards.

 

E.

[pvsurfer]

This subject has been discussed several times before in this very forum without a definitive answer from Retrospect tech-support.

 

 

 

Regardless of the backup technique (as far as I know, R does not do cloning or imaging; it does file-by-file copying), the very real concern that has to be addressed is whether or not R's Progressive Backups can be relied upon to restore a complete system to a virgin drive after a disaster (eg., a disk-crash). In past discussions, the answer to that question has boiled-down to 'maybe'. Because of my unsuccesful attempts to create a Disaster Recovery CD with R, I have serious doubts about its DR capability. So in addition to using R, I also use Ghost 2003 to create an exact image of my boot-drive -- just to 'play safe'.

 

 

 

It seems to me that the basic question that has to be answered in order to understand R's DR capability is whether or not R backs up OPEN files? If it doesn't, how can it possibly restore the system files that are in use when executing R to make your backup???

[natew]

Hi

 

Retrospects progressive backup and duplicate functions allow you to do a full system restore including OS, Applications and data from any point in time that you have a valid backup.

 

Keep in mind the DR CD is an optional too to make recovery easier. You don't need it to do a full system restore. Retrospect is fully capable of doing a live restore over the top of a running system.

 

I've done many restores and duplicates and can say with confidence that it works.

 

Hope that is clear enough

 

In regard to open files. Even though Windows is "open" when the backup is running very few of the files are actually locked in such a way that they cannot be read and copied. Dantz has other ways to get the files and information that is locked. Any file that couldn't be backed up because it was in use/locked by another application will be listed in the Retrospect log.

 

If you use XP Retrospect takes advantage of the built in Shadow copy API on the local machine to backup open files.

 

Thanks

Nate @ Dantz

[pvsurfer]

Hi Nate.

 

Thanks for your explanation and remarks (until now, I didn't realize you were a Dantz employee). However, I would like to pursue this some more...

 

First of all, you suggest that a DR CD is not really necessary to fully recover after a disaster. Well, I'm concerned about recovering everything that was on my system drive (onto a new drive) after a disk-crash. Without a DR CD how does one execute the Retrospect program (that resided on the crashed disk) to restore the backups?

 

And as far as a DR CD goes, twice I failed in my attempt to create one - both times resulting in more MB's then would fit on a CD, without any indication that it was capable of spanning it onto another CD!

 

I would sure appreciate it if you would address these issues...

[pvsurfer]

Nate, Id like to hear your response to my remarks.

[awnews]

Tossing my hat into the ring with pvsurfer, I'll throw out some of the reasons I don't choose to rely solely on the Retro DR process:

 

1) Time and effort during a restore. DR => multi-step process involving reformat, manual reinstall of OS, then restore of files via Retro.

 

As a side note, booting from another Windows drive (e.g. the one where I've restored during the restore also allows me to run assorted disk utilities and anti-viruses utilities. And it means that there are virtually *no* open files between my data backup and the boot drive I'm restoring to.

 

2) Some issues with restoring over a network (e.g. LAN, NIC drivers, etc.) running for a DR CD since I backup *to* drives on the LAN. This is not an issue if you're willing to (take the time and effort to) move that drive local to the machine. This is easier with IDE but may still be a problem with USB/Firewire drives that require drivers to be seen by the system. It always works when booting from a (second) Windows CD.

 

3) As pointed out by pvsurfer, unreliability or just annoying issues creating a DR CD that *fits* and actually *boots* and has *all* the drivers needed by a system. The last time I tried it, the DR process did *not* copy all the needed drivers (e.g. for my IDE card) that were needed to non-blue-screen boot my system. Also, Dantz says we need to recreate the DR whenever we make hardware changes to the system.

 

4) The Retro restore process appears to not fully restore some things that some programs need. An example is programs that required me to reinter my reg_codes after doing a restore. This may be caused by the programs using non-file areas (e.g. boot sectors), files using fixed sector info (and Retro restored them in different locations), "short name" issue, etc.

 

5) It was once documented that Retro didn't correctly restore the "short names" used by some (older) program so that a restore wouldn't allow these programs to work correctly (related to above). Don't know if that's still true in 6.5.

[natew]

Hi GoAWest,

 

The short name issue was fixed in 6.5. They are now backed up.

 

There was an issue that happened around Retro 6.5.336 where some files were not being overwritten properly during a live restore. Interestingly enough the DR CD worked around the problem beautifully. There has been an update to fix this problem since then so all files including Reg codes should restore properly. If not by all means let us know.

 

Thanks

Nate

[natew]

Hi

 

Retrospect is cabable of a live restore which means it can overwrite the currently active OS. For a restore without a DR CD you need to:

-Install the OS

-Install Retrospect

-Install drivers for your backup device if needed.

-Run the restore

 

DR just automates the process so you don't have to spend as much time babysitting the windows install or installing Retrospect.

 

The too big DR CD issue comes up from time to time. In short this happens because the size of the drivers that your system uses are too big. This is especially a problem with OEM systems. They tend to use international driver versions that include help files in multiple languages. Video drivers are huge and they get even bigger with all the international drivers and help files.

 

Dantz is looking into ways around this problem but it is an uphill battle as drivers and the windows install folder grow over time.

 

Nate

[awnews]

Since I haven't tried DR in the last year+ (since I found 5.x and 6.0x DR didn't work well or at all...) I decided to give it a try with 6.5 based on the comments in this thread. I started with my Dell PC XP work machine. I had to jump thru some hoops to find the CD installer code (the OS came pre-installed and IT had all the docs) and then had to use the C:\I386 folder since I don't have an installer CD. I then let the DR process run, only to find that it quit with an error:

 

+ Retrospect version 6.5.350

Launched at 6/29/2004 7:31 PM

+ Retrospect Driver Update, version 5.1.101

+ Executing Prepare for Disaster Recovery at 6/29/2004 7:39 PM

From Backup Set Full_C_Backup_Daily, Snapshot DRIVE_C (C:) 6/29/2004 1:30 AM

To CD-ROM image file Restore DRIVE_C.iso...

File "C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DRIVERS\atapi.sys": can't read, error -1020 (sharing violation)

6/29/2004 7:54:26 PM: 1 execution errors

 

I'm running as an admin-level user on this XP SP1 box, and Retro Pro is running as this same user. The indicated "atapi.sys" is shown to have security permissions that allow Full Control of this file to all in the Administrators group. Any ideas?

 

The cool thing about my "process" (Ghost to image, then use Retro to keep file backups) is that it just *works*, both during backup and restore.

[natew]

Hi GoAWest

 

This is interesting. Normally a 1020 error would happen because some other app had locked the file. It could be a one time kind of error. I would try creating the image again or with a different snapshot.

 

Thanks

Nate