flynz4 Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 (edited) I am looking for opinions on a good backup strategy for my household. Here is my configuration: - Primary Desktop, 500GB HDD, Vista Home Premium - Laptop-1, 160GB HDD, Vista Home Premium - Laptop-2, 160GB HDD, Vista Home Premium - [optional] Desktop, set up as a storage and FTP server running XP SP2 For backup devices I have: - NAS Raid 5 array, 4 500GB drives, 1.5 TB after raid - NAS Raid 5 drive array, 4 160GB drives, 480 GB after raid Backup software is Retrospect 7.5 and is currently running on the primary desktop. Also... that same machine has Mozy for off site backup of its own data files. Our "primary" copy of important data files (pictures, music, banking, etc) is on that computer. Currently, I am backing up two two data sets... one on each of the two NAS arrays. I have been doing it manually, but I am about to start a schedule to have it done nightly... alternating between the two backup sets. Once this is running... I am planning to add the laptops, one at a time, to the backup sets. I was a bit disappointed to learn that I could not use proactive backup with Retrospect Professional... but I will live. I am considering two changes... and this is where I would like some input. Change 1: Move Retrospect off of the Vista desktop onto a dedicated "server" running XP. Change 2: Change the "backup" to a "duplicate" on only the smaller of the two NAS boxes. Rationale: 1) Since Retrospect Professional does not perform proactive backups... it would be best to back them up during the evening when they are most likely turned on and on the network. During the day... they are often gone to school etc. It seems it would be better to run this from a dedicated machine, rather than from our primary desktop. I would probably back-up the laptops in the evening, and the desktop overnight. 2) My fear is that the smaller 480GB NAS box will fill up too fast with 3 machines doing progressive backups to it. If I was to switch to "duplicate" instead... I would be guaranteed that the backup set would not grow significantly day to day. Also... if I only duplicated user data files... it would be an "easy" way to recover those files after a computer replacement. 3) I would think that having one each of "backup" and "duplicate" data available... It would give me additional options should I need to rebuild, or replace a machine. Given the low cost of laptops/desktops... I would probably choose to replace damaged machines rather than rebuild from scratch... hence the data files would probably be sufficient. Still, it would be nice to have full recover options available... plus the ability to recover previous versions which is only available with "backup". As the "newbie" nomenclature next to my name indicates... I can probably use some guidance here... and I am not ashamed to ask /Jim Edited March 27, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Moving Retrospect to Windows XP is a good idea. Retrospect tends to be happier and easier to manage if it is not running on Vista Your strategy sounds okay, but keep in mind that a Duplicate really should not be used for disaster recovery purposes. You can not do a full system recovery from a duplicate the way you can with a backup. You probably already read this: http://kb.dantz.com/article.asp?article=1061&p=2 . I would probably choose to replace damaged machines rather than rebuild from scratch... hence the data files would probably be sufficient. Still, it would be nice to have full recover options available... plus the ability to recover previous versions which is only available with "backup". This is true and logical. I like backup because it gives me old versions I can restore from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flynz4 Posted March 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 (edited) Moving Retrospect to Windows XP is a good idea. Retrospect tends to be happier and easier to manage if it is not running on Vista I've been comming to the same conclusion. Are there any licensing issues moving my copy from one machine to the other? Do I need to invalidate and then acquire new keys? I have not researched this yet... and I suspect that it is in the documentation. I like backup because it gives me old versions I can restore from. I understand and agree with that position. My question is what is better given the fact that I have two NAS arrays: 1) Both running progressive backups 2) One running progressive backup (1.5 TB), the second runing duplicate (0.5 TB). The reason I am leaning toward option 2 is because the 2nd NAS box is fairly small (480 GB)... so I suspect that it will fill up relatively fast if doing progressive backups from 3 machines. Yet... it will be large enough to hold all of the "duplicate" data files from the 3 machines since they do not grow significantly over time. I also feel that since I will have a "backup" on hand running on a script... and since it will be to a Raid 5 NAS device... I do have some safety in that backup set even if one of the HDD drives in the NAS box fail. Hopefully my reasoning is sound. /Jim Edited March 27, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 No license concerns, you just install on the new box. You can copy your config file from one computer to another to keep your old settings if you want. Duplicates sometimes get flakey when working with non Windows based NAS boxes due to the file system issues on the NAS. I prefer 2 backups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flynz4 Posted March 28, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2008 (edited) Duplicates sometimes get flakey when working with non Windows based NAS boxes due to the file system issues on the NAS. I prefer 2 backups. Robin, Thank you again. I will do alternating backups to both NAS boxes as you suggest. One more question. Are there any concerns of doing "duplicate" operations to the D: drive in the XP backup server that I am setting up? This would be in addition to doing "backup" operations to the NAS drives. If I was to replicate... then I could duplicate the datafiles (music, photos, office docs, etc) of all 3 machines onto sections of the D: drive... and then also move Mozy to the XP backup server... and all of my user files for all 3 machines would be then backed up offsite to Mozy. I guess the question is: Does Retrospect Duuplicate Operations also get flaky when backing up to an XP machine with NTFS drives? /Jim Edited March 28, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.