jim144 Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 My aim in backing up is to have a complete, bootable image of my source drive. Using MacOS 10.3.7, Retro 6.0.204. Then, if the source drive gives up, hopefully I can do a complete functional restore, including permissions, etc., (from the backup on an external hard drive). The Question: Which will give a better restoration-- a file backup or a duplicate backup? Thanks, JIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natew Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 Hi This may not be necessary. The Retrospect install CD is a bootable retrospect environment. You can boot from the CD and use Retrospect to run a restore. In that case a file backup or a duplicate will work equally well. I recommend backup though... You could also create a "recovery" partition on your external hard disk and install OSX and Retrospect on it. That way you will always be able to boot up quickly. Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfN Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 1. In the event of internal hard drive failure, wouldn't restoration from a backup set require first: a. installing the OS on a new drive from the Panther CD set b. running OS and security updates c. installing Retrospect 6 from its CD on the new drive d. updating Retrospect 2. What other steps would be required to restore the rest of the files from the backup set? 3. Nate, your idea of a recovery partition on a 2nd hard drive is a great idea because it would save a lot of slow and tedious effort involved in using cds to install the OS and Retrospect 6. But wouldn't you still have to go through Software Update and installation of Retrospect updates and new drivers? I do both backup and duplication. I recall how little time and effort was required last year when a 3-year-old drive died to be up and running immediately with the external drive's clones of my two partitions and to duplicate them back to a brand new drive. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jim 144: On an old 733-mhz G4 QuickSilver the last time I did a complete duplication to an external drive, in which I elected to invest a lot of time by choosing the verification option: Completed: 68580 files, 4.1 GB Performance: 75.2 MB/minute (62.0 copy, 95.6 compare) Duration: 01:51:18 (00:00:06 idle/loading/preparing) Updating my cloned 10.3.7 partition on another drive typically takes about 17 to 19 minutes without running verification. When I ran Duplicate 10 days later: Completed: 4310 files, 372.5 MB Performance: 19.6 MB/minute Duration: 00:19:33 (00:00:35 idle/loading/preparing) All my documents, photos and Microsoft Office 2004 database are stored on another partition: That typically takes Retrospect less than 2 minutes to update every 7-10 days. Example: Completed: 207 files, 44.6 MB Performance: 27.2 MB/minute Duration: 00:01:41 (00:00:03 idle/loading/preparing) Respectfully, Norm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natew Posted January 14, 2005 Report Share Posted January 14, 2005 Hi All you need to do is boot from the Retrospect CD. You will be able to do a full restore from backup without installing the OS or Retrospect. Software updates won't be necessary either. You are backing up to a hard disk right? If thats the case you don't need to worry about doing updates in order to do the restore. Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim144 Posted January 25, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 Thank you for your replies. A Dantz tech informs me that the Backup is the better way to restore from because it has recorded invisible files. permissions, etc. that render a restored disk to function the way the original did. He implies that the duplicate is missing a lot of behid-the-scenes items and may not function well. I am going to do save both. I'll use the backup for a full restoral and use the duplicate to pick up an occasional file that I have acciddntally deleted. The problerm with the duplicate is that it is the latest version, instead of incremental with snapshots, so that if I find a file is corrupted, I can't go back to an earlier version. My answer to this is to record three of these and rotate every other day giving myself about a week of backlogged items. JIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louise Parrish Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 If you do the backup from backup rather than duplicate, is it a bootable backup.. Thanks. Louise Parrish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.