Creating a backup after performing a restore operation
I am using Acronis True Image Home 11 on a new installation of Windows XP SP3.
I have created an initial FULL system image backup (backup_1.tib). Subsequently I created a series of INCREMENTAL system image backups (backup_2.tib, backup_3.tib, ..., through backup_10.tib). Due to a system error, I restored the system from backup_5.tib, and then made subsequent changes to the data on the system that need to be preserved. Therefore, backup_6.tib through backup_10.tib now contain unneeded data.
I would now like to resume my creation of INCREMENTAL backups. My question is, what is the proper way to do this?
1. Do I create a new INCREMENTAL backup and select backup_5.tib as the existing backup file when prompted at the Backup Archive Location screen, since that was the last backup file with correct data? If so, how will this affect the automatic numbering of the backup .tib files? Or should I select backup_10.tib, since that was the last incremental backup of the series?
2. Should I create a DIFFERENTIAL backup? If so, do I select the initial FULL backup as the existing backup file, and then create a new series of INCREMENTAL backups? Or do I select backup_5.tib or backup_10.tib as the existing backup file?
3. Should I create a new FULL backup with a new name and start a new series of INCREMENTAL backups?
Essentially I have created a new branch in the backup series starting from backup_5.tib, and I would like to continue INCREMENTAL backups while minimizing the backup size if possible, as well as maintaining the logical connection to the previous 5 backup points (backup_1.tib through backup_5.tib).
Pat,
Thanks for your response. I am actually using ATI Home 11, an older version, not ATI 2011.
Those are great general practice suggestions, but unfortunately that doesn't answer my specific question of how to configure the next immediate backup I need to make: INCREMENTAL, DIFFERENTIAL, OR FULL, and based on backup_1.tib, backup_5.tib, or backup_10.tib? If I simply continued to make an INCREMENTAL backup based on backup_10.tib for example, I would have a very large INCREMENTAL backup_11.tib file, since it would be using backup_10.tib as a reference, which has much different (and incorrect data).
Jamel,
OK. To make the backup as small as possible, building on top of the last backup you restored (_5.tib) makes the most sense. This will de facto make the current _6, etc. irrelevant, so you can delete those, before you restart from _5
Ok, great! If I understand correctly then, I can make either an INCREMENTAL or DIFFERENTIAL backup, and when prompted to select an existing backup file, I can select any of the backups in the series? If this is true, I have a couple more questions:
1. How will the new backup file be numbered? e.g. backup_11.tib? Does this depend on whether or not I delete backup_6.tib through backup_10.tib?
2. Will this cause any issue with the sequencing of the backup files or any future restoration? i.e. will ATI still recognize that these files are part of the same sequence?
Thanks for your help!
Remember, an incremental should be done based on a full or an incremental. A differential should be based on a full. Yes ATI numbers the files based on what is already there. You could delete the files you don't need, or simple move them manually to another folder and keep them until you want to delete them, or you need to delete them, in case you eventually delete the full they are based on.
Also, remember to do a new full backup from time to time...
I think TI 11 will continue with the next number (it would be 6 if 5 is the last one). I would not recommend creating a Differential in an Incremental chain. I would not select an obsolete backup as the base for the new one -- keep it simple. Delete the old ones or move them to a different folder first to get them out of the way.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the restore may not have placed all the data back into the same sectors. Your Incremental backup may come out very large. In most cases like this I recommend creating a new Full image.
TI should still recognize the "set" of files. You can verify this after you create the image by selecting them and seeing what TI reports. Running a Validation is also recommended.
Thank you Mudcrab and Pat. It sounds like it makes sense to delete (or move to another folder) backup_6.tib through backup_10.tib. And regardless of whether I create an INCREMENTAL or FULL backup, it's going to be very large. However, if I create a new FULL image it will require a new name, so how does TI recognize that this new FULL image belongs with the previous set (backup_1.tib through backup_5.tib)?
Also, I was planning on creating a DIFFERENTIAL after some more data processing. I was under the impression that the user is free to choose a DIFFERENTIAL or INCREMENTAL along the chain as preferred, and that TI would recognize the chain and effectively batch up all changes in the INCREMENTAL images between the last FULL image and the current DIFFERENTIAL. In other words, basing the new DIFFERENTIAL off the last FULL or the last INCREMENTAL would give me the same result, namely all changes since the last FULL.
@Mudcrab: why do you recommend against creating such a DIFFERENTIAL? Also, according to your advice, anytime a user performs a complete restore the best practice is to move or delete any subsequent backups from that series?
A new full will have a different name. ATI will add an integer between parentheses at the end of the character chain: Backup(1)
With TI 11 you will have to name the new Full image and the new Full will not be attached to the old set in any way. The new Full will be the base image for future Incrementals or Differentials. The old "set" (Full to 5) would need to be retained if you want to keep it. Or, if you don't make a new Full and instead make a new Incremental, you must keep them.
The reason I don't recommend mixing Incrementals and Differentials in the same chain is just to keep things simple. TI may get confused. Creating a complicated chain is just asking for it to be broken.
When you create a Differential in a chain of Incrementals you are basically replacing all of the images between the Full and the new backup but retaining the chain. It's much safer (in my opinion) to do one or the other.
Older versions of TI do not restore the image back to the same sectors. This means that when you restore the image and then create a new Incremental or Differential the size may be the same as (or close to) a Full image. If you also add this new backup to an existing chain it creates a more complex chain and higher risk with no space savings. In addition, the new backup is no good with the previous ones in the chain -- meaning even more wasted space. It's better to just start a new chain and then you can later delete the old one to regain the space (if you want to).
The newer versions of TI (I think starting with 2009) attempt to restore to the same sectors. This means you can restore and pick up from an existing chain and still have normal sized Incrementals/Differentials.
You are free to make the type of backup you want. Just pay attention to the complexity, risk factors, and space required. There is nothing wrong with trying to add to the old chain first and see what size it ends up. I've done this quite a few times, which is why I generally avoid it -- I end up creating a new Full anyway.
Mudcrab,
Thank you for your thorough explanation and great advice, including those factors to consider. It is very helpful and much appreciated. I have some critical data, so I needed to make sure I am configuring this next backup correctly.
I think I have my answer (create a new FULL backup). However, just to be clear (and for the benefit of any future readers of this thread), anytime a user creates a new backup image based on a previous (i.e. not the latest) backup in a chain of INCREMENTAL images, the user is effectively creating a new "branch" of the backup chain, and the old "stub" of this chain becomes obsolete and can be deleted if need be? I thought ATI linked all these files and was concerned that disrupting even the obsolete part of the chain by deleting or moving would cause problems.
And if the user chooses to make an INCREMENTAL backup after a restore, ATI will recognize the new branch as part of the old set and will still be able to restore correctly?
Along those lines, does anyone know what the official Acronis-recommended best practice is for creating backups after performing a restore?
Regarding disk sectors, there is an option in TI Home 11 to perform a restore using a sector-by-sector approach. I presume this would have restored the image back to the same sectors and would have then hypothetically made my next INCREMENTAL backup normal-sized?
You would need to "break" the chain before you create the new backup. In your case, break off 6+ so you can add to 5. Otherwise, TI will add to the end of the chain. You can't create a branch (execpt manually).
TI 11 doesn't track the files like the later versions. It still used the old method -- you can manually move/delete the files as needed.
A sector-by-sector restore would probably work. You can certainly try it and find out. If I remember correctly, TI 11 would let you select that even if you didn't do a sector-by-sector backup. Just keep in mind that if you don't break the chain, the size of the next backup may still be larger than you think due to TI going off the end of the chain and needing to "remove" the changes made in the future backups. In other words, it would be saving changes from ...12 instead of ...5.
Many times when people need to revert to an "older" backup there's a good reason and many of those reasons mean that the later backups are no longer usable or wanted (except maybe to extract data). As an example, say the computer got infected by a bad virus at backup 6 and backups continued until 12 before it was found out. You would want to restore back to 5 and would probably never need to (or want to) restore to 6-12. Same goes for program/Windows corruption.
You would need to "break" the chain before you create the new backup. In your case, break off 6+ so you can add to 5. Otherwise, TI will add to the end of the chain. You can't create a branch (execpt manually).
I'm not sure I understand the terminology here. Would you mind clarifying? What exactly do you mean by "break"ing a chain? Moving/deleting the backup files? How does one tell ATI that subsequent backup files should no longer be connected in the chain? Haven't you de facto created a branch when you restore to a previous backup in the chain, resume making normal changes to the system, then create another backup? I would consider backups 6...10 in that case an obsolete branch.
TI 11 doesn't track the files like the later versions. It still used the old method -- you can manually move/delete the files as needed.
A sector-by-sector restore would probably work. You can certainly try it and find out. If I remember correctly, TI 11 would let you select that even if you didn't do a sector-by-sector backup. Just keep in mind that if you don't break the chain, the size of the next backup may still be larger than you think due to TI going off the end of the chain and needing to "remove" the changes made in the future backups. In other words, it would be saving changes from ...12 instead of ...5.
If I understand correctly, I think the last scenario you are referring to is what I was trying to avoid by doing a simple INCREMENTAL backup after my restore. The "future" backups you are referring to are 6...10 which now contain obsolete backup data.
Many times when people need to revert to an "older" backup there's a good reason and many of those reasons mean that the later backups are no longer usable or wanted (except maybe to extract data). As an example, say the computer got infected by a bad virus at backup 6 and backups continued until 12 before it was found out. You would want to restore back to 5 and would probably never need to (or want to) restore to 6-12. Same goes for program/Windows corruption.
Right. So how do you remove ATI Home 11's tracking of backup files 6-12? Simply by deleting/moving them?
Since TI 11 is going by the filenames you can "break" the chain just by moving the end somewhere else. If you have a chain of 20 (1 Full + 19 Incrementals), you can "break" it at 10 by moving or deleting 11-20. TI 11 doesn't track the file splits -- it just uses the filename and header info.
If you kept the old splits you could later "reattach" them to the first part (Full through 10) and once again have access to the original Full through 20. The "detached" splits would have no value by themselves.