Help with backup strategy to two hard drives
OK, I've got True Image 2013 installed and more or less working. I have digested Grover's excellent tutorials and understand the options (incremental, differential, clean-up, etc.), but I'm looking for some advice on a strategy. I'm doing a disc-based backup of my 1 TB C: drive, so it captures the system, the D: recovery partition, and my data files. I have two 1TB hard drives (one internal, one eSATA external) available for storing backups. The problem is that a full back up is 435Gig or nearly half of one of the backup drives. So, I would never be able to have more than two version chains on a backup drive, and there could come a time when only one will fit (when you figure the extra for a series of differential back ups.
So, I'm considering two options:
Option 1:
use one disc for a differential backup (perhaps daily or every couple of days), with a new full backup every two weeks. This would give me two version chains going back one month. Then, use the second drive for differential backups, perhaps once a month with a new full backup after six months. This would give me some long term backup.
Option 2:
use the two drives in an alternating backup scheme. Set up one backup task to run a differential backup every Wednesday, with a new back up set once a month and the other to do the same thing, except run every Saturday. This would essentially give me two current backups (safer). I could even start them a month apart giving me history going back an extra 30 days.
Do either of these make sense? Any big disadvantage I'm not seeing? One preferable to the other? Something entirely different I'm not thinking about?
When I restore, it looks like Acronis will include both backup sets in the display of "days" that are available for restore. So, even though I will have a different task running to each backup drive, they will be functionally morphed if I ever have to go looking for file.
Thanks for any advice or suggestions.
PS: My original intent was to do image backups to one drive and a monthly clone to the other drive (for native access to files). But, when I went to try a test run of the clone, I saw that I was going to have two drives with the same volume label and instantly saw the potential for Windows Explorer operator error disaster that you guys mention as a downside of cloning.
Are you positive that after compression your image size will be as stated? A standard used sector image of 500Gb with normal compression results in an approximate 100GB tib file for a full image.
Yeah, I was surprised. I've done two separate full disc backups specifically set with "normal" compression on the performance tab, one to each backup disc. I ended up at 435 gig for each backup. I think the problem is that the overwhelming majority of my space-consuming files are music, video, and image files that are already compressed in their native formats. Native photoshop and illustrator files are all compressed these days as are TIFs and PDFs and MP3s and JPGs and MP4s and so forth. On the flip side, any incremental or differential backups I do should be pretty negligible in size.
I should run a test backup with no compression and again with high compression to see if it's even worth compressing the archives.
IMO, using ATI to backup files that are already compressed and generally, don't change, is a bit inefficient. If you have irreplaceable content (that you cannot buy again) you should complement your disk and partition backup of the content with a simply sync to some other disk. The reason is that if your disk image gets corrupted, you lose the entire backup, and possibly versions of your content. It is OK for OS and apps, because you can reinstall these if push com to shove, but for art and personal content, what is lost is lot.
You could also create a partition for your OS and apps and another for your content. Use a disk and partition backup for your entire disk, including all partitions, exclude all folders on the content partition (that would be your system backup). Create a file backup for your content that you need to keep a versioning history of, and a sync or simple copy of all your content. Alternate both disks using different tasks.
Ah OK, you won't get much more compression at all from compressed video and music files, in fact True Image might not be the ideal software for this purpose, it being more skewed towards complete disk Os and standard data contents.
However, what I would do, is make two alternating tasks one for each storage drive - so option 2 in your first post is the way to go.
Thanks. The sync idea might be just the ticket for doing what I had hoped to do with cloning, which is giving me a readily available native format copy of my data. I'm doing a test local sync to one of my hard drives now, so I may end up doing sync to one, disk/partition backup set to the other.
If I change a document, is the revised version going to automatically sync? Or can I set it to only sync once a day? I know I can store versions on the Acronis Cloud, but I'm thinking local hard drive. I want to make sure that I have a way to recover if I accidently delete 10 pages of a document and hit "save" without thinking!
I had always kept my data on a separate partition (or usually separate drive) until some Windows upgrade years ago stuffed everything into "documents and settings". At this point, I've got too many page layout docs with linked graphics that it would be a nightmare to move everything and break the links.
I'm at the stage of actually doing test back ups (or test syncs) to be sure I actually know what I'm doing and what I get before I settle on a strategy.
Unfortunately, with the basic sync function of Acronis, unless you use their online service, there is no versioning with sync. I am using SyncBack SE which has plenty of features and settings including retention rules, etc. The Windows 8 file history is pretty good as well and keep the files flat. Genie Timeline is another solution as well.
Just adding to Pat L's comments, I would not use the Sync option in your case, the sync is live at all times, so if you move or delete a file on one system it will be mirrored immediately on the other system, and if the deletion was by mistake there is no way back.
I agree with Colin and Pat. True Image is primarily a drive/partition imaging tool. While it does sync, I don't think the Sync feature allows sufficient user control.
Like you, I have a lot of non-compressable media. When I image my entire drive, including music, it does't compress much as my music is mostly already-compressed FLAC. So, what I do is to peform full disk images using ATI, but exclude music. I separately use Robocopy (free, part of Windows) to do one-way sync of my music and all user data to the external drives.
I have two external HDs that I use for these backups. I used one for several days or a week or so, then put it away safely and use the second one. A week or so later I rotate again.
hwc,
Regarding the number of backups you can store on your 1TB disk, you will only be able to store ONE full backups and the reason is this.
Acronis always creates the replacement before deleting the original so you would never have the room it came time to create the temporary #3.
You would have room for some a few incrementals or differentials as long as the total size of the all backups related to that single task remained under 500 GB when it came time to create the full backup #2.
Thanks, Grover. I figured that out from your tutorials. I know that, at most, I'll be able to have one version chain and enough room for a full backup, if I don't have large numbers of differentials or incrementals. Does acronis behave in the same way (writing a full backup first) if you cleanup/delete old version chains by date instead of number versions? In other words, if I tell it to clean up any version chain older than 28 days, is it going to write a new full backup first, even though a new full backup is not scheduled?
-----------
I would really like to avoid the complexity of backing up different kinds of files in different ways. I want to set up an automatic schedule that just works with no intervention whatsoever from me. I want no opportunity to "wait til tomorrow and I'll backup".... :)
What I'm leaning towards is using Syncback (or similar) to do a nightly scheduled sync ("backup", the one that doesn't erase deleted files from the target drive) of the entire drive. Once a month, I can run a "mirror" that gets rid of "deleted" files from the target. I set up a test sync with acronis last night and I don't like the real-time sync. It defeats the purpose of being able retrieve a file I deleted by mistake a day ago.
Then, I'll use acronis to do a full disc/differential image in two tasks alternating between two hard drives.
OK. Thanks to everyone, I'm nearing a strategy.
I downloaded the trail version of SynBack and am completing a full file copy backup of my C: drive to one of the 1TB disks. That seems to have gone without a hitch. Should be just under 500 GB leaving me a lot of room for daily incrementals, while keeping old versions of changed for a while. I'm thinking once a month, I'll do the clean version that results in an exact duplicate again. That'll give me 30 days to figure out if I deleted or changed a file by mistake.
That left me one 1TB drive for acronis and no matter how I cut it, that only allows one version of the full disk image. Rather than buy a second 1TB drive and alternating, I spring for the extra $25 and got a 2TB. I'll probably use that one to store three monthly full-backups, ditching the oldest when the fourth month is written. Nice and safe. No incrementals or differentials. Run one on the last day of each month.
I'll use the 1TB drive for the current month. Full backup on the 1st, differential once a week for the rest of the month. A complete backup of that month will happen on the other drive on the last day of the month, so I'll start over clean with a new month.
I believe I should be able to automate that and, even in a worst case scenario, I should be able to recover the system or individual files.