The newest way is to create an (encrypted) repository of chunked data parts. For example you have a 30GB mkv file, and you change the metadata, then does it store the entire 30GB again, or just the changes? The most important feature if the backup software can store delta changes to a file. But this also makes it impossible to upload to cloud, because you will have an ever-changing huge full backup file.įor the data files, there are new methods to use. ![]() The advantage of the reverse method is that you will always have a latest version full image, that you can recover and an independent set of changes that goes back in time, and these can be deleted if not needed. It is also a con that if you delete a lot of data, the image file won't be smaller (I think, not tested). It needs a merging phase at each backup run, where the changes are merged into the full backup to get it up-to-date, while the simple incremental just writes the changes to a new file and done. (However it is advised to "reset" the full image from time to time in this case too, but technically it is not necessary.) With reverse-incremental you will have one "synthetic" full backup with a latest data, and bunch of delta history files going back in time. With simple incremental you have to have space for at least two full backups, so at least twice the size of the source data, because you create a new full backup periodically, but you have to keep the previous full backup too to allow history. This is the opposite of the classic incremental method where you have a full image and a set of changes going forward in time since the full backup was taken. The most space-saving solution is the reverse-incremental method, where you have a full image, and a set of changes going back in time. Image backups don't have effective deduplication especially with encryption. And a third factor comes in if you also want cloud backup.įor image backups you can use Macrium or Veeam. One for OS drive image backup, and one for the data. Now comes the tricky part, because there is no software I know that can do both type of backups correctly, there will be always drawbacks. Otherwise you should split the solution to image and data backup. If you have only one smallish <1TB drive, then image backup is fine for everything. It can be easy, or very complex, depending on your needs. I don't put anything off-site that isn't encrypted, so this one is a need-to-have.Īnyways I've looked at enough suggestions that now I'm a bit overwhelmed and could really use some guidance. It must have encryption on it of some sort. But I'm unclear on the usability differences between them. I see veeam and macrium thrown around a lot. I'm fine with paid, though I would prefer something I own outright and isn't contingent on a subscription.īig bonus would be if I can back up directly to a network share, though that's not a deal-breaker for me. I'm willing to trade higher compression / smaller size for a longer restore time. Primarily, I'm looking for something that has great compression / de duplication. I'm looking for something I can use to restore from bare metal in the event of a drive failure, with a secondary use for getting older versions of files or something I've deleted and decide I want again. But can't seem to find much that differentiates one from the other beyond 'I use it and it works.' ![]() I've read through a lot of previous posts and seen a lot of recommendations. Just make sure to tag the post with the flair and give a little background info/context. On Fridays we'll allow posts that don't normally fit in the usual data-hoarding theme, including posts that would usually be removed by rule 4: “No memes or 'look at this '”
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |