How do you optimize 'data anchoring'?

[wilbertnl]

Hello All,

I'm in my 14-day trial period for ISR and I need some input.

I've been using Acronis True Image and Farstone Restore-it for a long time. Both solutions are excellent and at the same time have minor disadvantages.
For now that means that I have to change my system concept from disk imaging to snapshots.

So, in order to use disk imaging the easy way, I had a system partition and a data partition, restoring the system partition took a few minutes. (I'm shocked to see how ISR changes to a different snapshot instantly!)

For the 14-day IRS evaluation, I reinstalled windows and removed the data partition: C:\ is the one and only for system and data.

I'm trying to develop a strategy for the data anchors and I found out that the amount of folders/files to anchor is limited.
Which means that I need to create a folder which functions as data container, similar to the previous data partition.
So, I would create a c:\userdata folder which holds %username%\desktop, %username%\my documents, %username%\favorites and %username%\mozilla or %username%\outlook, like I had on the previous data partition.

Do I understand this right? Or do you guys have different strategies?
Also: When data is added or changed in the anchors, this doesn't affect the snapshots themselves? An archive of some snapshot is stored without the anchors? right?

Also, it seems that a snapshot isn't static like a diskimage.
With reloading a diskimage I knew to which status I would revert beforehand. It took actually some time to create a diskimage with all the settings to my liking.
So, I get the understanding that I need to archive a snapshot to approach the same idea of securing a certain status.
I understand that a frozen snapshot means: "do whatever you like until the next reboot", is that correct? (Very nice when I want to test software)

With disk images, I usally had an image of OEM, aka "right after install, with updated drivers and hotfixes", and then another (incremental) image of a complete system with additional installed software. I wished that I was able to create am image tree: OEM with more than one incremental derivate:
OEM - 1. betatest trendmicro internet security
--- - 2. betatest NOD32 antivirus
This seems exactly possible with ISR, right?

Anyway, I'm struggling with the transit of concept from image to snapshot and I appreciate some help in this area.

ISR looks very promissing.
Thank you,
Wilbert

[Rilla927]

Is this true that Data Anchoring is limited? If so, how limited?

Thanks

Rilla927

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Is this true that Data Anchoring is limited? If so, how limited?

Thanks

Rilla927 <-QUOTE}

I honestly don't know, but then I've only tried anchoring My Doc's Doing much beyond that would become self defeating.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> Is this true that Data Anchoring is limited? If so, how limited?

Thanks

Rilla927 <-QUOTE}

"Anchored file list too long":

[Peter2150]

Off the top of my head I see stuff I wouldn't recommend anchoring. Like the desktop, and also Local settings application stuff. That is stuff that can be easily messed up and you want it protected by FDISR. I would suggest just anchoring My Documents. That should cover all your data.

The other stuff can be kept current by refreshing the other snapshot(S)

Pete

[Peter2150]

Another factor on Data anchoring is for "Backup" purposes I also keep an archive with no data anchoring. Having a long list would make that a nightmare. Adding and removing my documents is easy

Pete

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> ... Like the desktop, and also Local settings application stuff. ... <-QUOTE}

Yes, the desktop might hold shortcuts that are invalid in some snapshots, but it may also hold complete files. Especially my wife has a habit of storing anything she downloads visible on her desktop. :)

The local settings path points to the Outlook Express storage.
I rearranged the data that I want to anchor as subfolders of an 'anchor folder', like c:\anchor\%username%\Outlook Express, c:\anchor\%username\my documents.
Pretty much the same as maintaining a separate data partition, would you not agree?

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> ... The other stuff can be kept current by refreshing the other snapshot(S) ... <-QUOTE}
I'm still confused in this area, I don't understand how I can update my current snapshot.
I open the copy/update wizard, select as source the current snapshot, but then I can only select other snapshots or 'create new snapshot'.
I don't see where the update function is?

[Acadia]

How could you, and why would you want to update your current Snapshot; it is always up-to-date.

Acadia

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> I'm still confused in this area, I don't understand how I can update my current snapshot.
I open the copy/update wizard, select as source the current snapshot, but then I can only select other snapshots or 'create new snapshot'.
I don't see where the update function is? <-QUOTE}

Hi Wilbertnl

At this point the best recommendation is to read, reread, and reread again, the help documentation. This is essential for this program.

Pete

[Acadia]

I would do as Peter recommended; I had to read all three, the User Guide, the FAQs, and the Knowledgebase, each several times before I began to understand this program. It is only complicated because it is so flexible. 8)

Acadia

[crofttk]

Yep, you current snapshot is THE ONE YOU'RE OPERATING FROM, and you are "updating" it by writing changes to your hard drive.

Now, you CAN, update your "secondary" snapshot whenever you feel the need or on a schedule. "Secondary" snapshot here is simply a point in time copy of your primary (or "operating") snapshot.

Also, regarding anchoring any of the stuff besides your "My Documents" structure, like desktop, local settings, application data, etc., remeMber that alot of these files are linked to your installed programs and the registry (even contains some of the registry !) and you could have big problems reverting to a snapshot for which these folders and their data is not in synch with the instaqll programs and entire registry of that particular snapshot. Itwould be a risky and complex strategy, IMO (humble or not, don't matter -- it's my opinion good or bad:P ).

Plus, consider that if you start developing separate snapshots for sandboxing or experimenting with new/beta programs you don't want to affect your baseline system, you have to think carefully through the usefulness, or NOT, of data anchoring in that situation -- I'm sure Peter2150 can tell you plenty about that.

And, YES, read the documentation, take a break, and then keep coming back and reading it again until it sinks in -- that's what it took for me.

[wilbertnl]

Well, I have been reading the manual and FAQ's, but sometimes I miss an example to clarify the information.

I do appreciate the concerns about my choice of anchored data, but to me this is the same choice I made when I used disk imaging of the system partition. I'm aware of possible flaws, but it works for me. I make sure that I only anchor data, and not settings.

Crofttk:
You say that I update my current snapshot when I make changes to my system. But when I boot from the snapshot, it all reverts to the original status of when the snapshot whas created, right?

With diskimaging I made changes and was able to update any selected image.
[for example load OEM image, update drivers, save OEM image]
It seems to work different with ISR.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE->

Crofttk:
You say that I update my current snapshot when I make changes to my system. But when I boot from the snapshot, it all reverts to the original status of when the snapshot whas created, right?

W <-QUOTE}

No. Assuming you aren't messing with Freezing, and I wouldn't recommend that at first, when you leave a snapshot, it remains as you left it. The snapshot you are working in is just like your system without FDISR. You came back and it is like when you left it. Only when you do a copy from one to another is one changed. Note if you are comparing to Rollback, they are totally different.

Pete

[Acadia]

{QUOTE-> Note if you are comparing to Rollback, they are totally different. <-QUOTE}
Good point, they operate in totally different ways. There is NEVER any need to update the Snapshot that you are in; if you leave it to go to another Snapshot, then come back to it, you will find it exactly as you left it.

Acadia

[Leapfrog Software]

Greetings All,

Ok, let me put in my 2 cents, this time as only a user of the ISR technology.

I personally Data Anchor "My Documents" and "Favorites". Lots of folks also add "Desktop" as well, but I like to keep all documents, projects, etc. in a common folder like "My Documents". I even redirect Outlook and Outlook Express+address book to a sub-folder in “My Documents”. If I need to backup my data or transfer it to another system, it just makes it easier to drag and drop one or two folders. As the years pass and CRS (Can't Remember *Stuff*) sets in, one can benefit from all the organization one can get!

I have found the more folks Data Anchor, the more they forget what they have anchored over the long run, and/or boot to a snapshot that had something Data Anchored deep in Local Settings, Application Data, etc. that *Bill G* did not want one to mess with, and now holds the possibility of being out of sync with the registry or another application.

Now, from a LSI perspective, the number of Data Anchored folder is limited because of the above reason as well. During our intensive and initial beta testing, folks found all sorts of ways to Data Anchoring and make our task of troubleshooting, shall we say, interesting.

I hope this helps. If you need more information on a few best practices of Data Anchoring, check out this application note (http://www.leapfrogsoftware.com/support_info/application_notes/pdfs/AppNote-BestDataAnchoringFreezePractices.pdf).

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> ... I have found the more folks Data Anchor, the more they forget what they have anchored over the long run, and/or boot to a snapshot that had something Data Anchored deep in Local Settings, Application Data, etc. that *Bill G* did not want one to mess with, and now holds the possibility of being out of sync with the registry or another application ... <-QUOTE}
With documents and data I'm compulsively organized. [team workers praise me for that].
With disk imaging I had my stuff on a data partition, and I got the feeling that data anchoring would eliminate the need to create a container for important data.

I see your point that you don't want to anchor stuff in hidden folders with names that start with '{' and end with '}'. But fact is that to prepare my data for anchoring, I still find myself editing registry entries to change pointers on the disk. For each and every user on my computer.

Hmm...

I would rather see it like this: "Anchor 'c:\documents and settings' except for registry files and other settings data"

[TonyW]

I anchor 'My Documents' and the OE email storage.

[Acadia]

Has anyone ever given any thought as to how easy it might be for a computer virus to spread to other Snapshots if the virus contaminates something that is Anchored? This is the only reason that I do not use the Data Anchor feature. Is this a reasonable fear or not?

Acadia

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> ... This is the only reason that I do not use the Data Anchor feature ... <-QUOTE}

What you say???
You don't use the most powerful feature of this software?

No, I think this is very close to mysophobia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysophobia).
You copy updated address books and other documents to each snapshot, then?
Or do you have a secret second partition, which in effect has the same potential of hazard.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Has anyone ever given any thought as to how easy it might be for a computer virus to spread to other Snapshots if the virus contaminates something that is Anchored? This is the only reason that I do not use the Data Anchor feature. Is this a reasonable fear or not?

Acadia <-QUOTE}

Hi Acadia

Depends on what you Anchor. I doubt many virii attack what is in my doc's

Pete

[Acadia]

Peter, I'm mostly thinking email. I've only ever contracted three viruses in my 7 years of computing, and all three of them came thru the email. Also, using MacroExpress I've created macros that enable me to quickly copy files (My Docs, Email, Favs) from a Snapshot over to my other hard drive in case I want to put those files into another Snapshot. I just have this thing of wanting to keep my Snapshots COMPLETELY separated from one another, no "connection" between them.

Acadia

[wilbertnl]

Acadia,

I can see how you don't need your Office documents when you are in your gaming snapshot.

But when I beta-test antivirus software then I need this software in a separate snapshot and at the same time I need to be be able to use my computer without data limitations.
In my lifetime of computer experience I have been infected only once, and a couple virii have been caught in time.

When your concern is getting infected through e-mail, would it help you if you don't use a local email client anymore, but only webmail?
I'm using an IMAP mailserver, which means that the mail is never downloaded to my computer, until I open it. And as long as I'm able to connect to the IMAP server, I'm able to read my e-mail wherever I am.

[Acadia]

I don't do any gaming.

Webmail is NOT an acceptable solution, I do not want my important email with sensitive information stored on someone else's server; I only use webmail for unimportant stuff and as spam traps.

Acadia

[Peter2150]

Hi Acadia

You make a point, but I've nailed that coffin pretty tightly with other security software. For example zip files are tightly controlled in that 1) only explorer is allowed to start winzip, so for example Outlook which can conceiveably start winzip can't without specific permission. Also anything run automatically from with in winzip has to be started by winzip. I have it set so it has to ask before it can do that. Also KAV 6.0's PDM module monitors office macro's for behavior so anything in a doc file that's bad gets flagged. Plus I do a full AV scan of my system every night. Only takes a few minutes.

Agreed if I wasn't doing all this I might go the same way you are.

Pete

[TonyW]

{QUOTE-> Has anyone ever given any thought as to how easy it might be for a computer virus to spread to other Snapshots if the virus contaminates something that is Anchored? <-QUOTE}No, because I tend to update my "rollback" snapshot after I've done a full-scan of my system. In any case, after that things are scanned in real-time using the RTM, including email.

Even if you don't anchor, it could be argued viruses could attach themselves to the next snapshot when you copy/update it. Providing your system is clear upon each scan, there shouldn't be a problem.

[Acadia]

If a person can keep and maintain a clean Snapshot, then all Snapshots updated with THAT Snapshot are also clean. Anchoring is the one question-mark in that process, so I exlude this otherwise excellent feature. Yes, I am strick with keeping my Snapshots clean and I intend to keep it that way! 8)

Acadia

[TonyW]

Ok, so why bother with data anchoring as a feature? If people can just update other snapshots with that one clean snapshot as you suggest, there isn't really a need for data anchoring then other than potentially reduce the size of snapshots?

I use data anchoring because I don't update my "rollback" snapshot that regularly, and if something happened and I had to boot into that snapshot, any work done since would be lost. With the work anchored, they will be current whichever snapshot I boot into. That's how I see it.

By the way, I do backup important documents daily as a means of another recovery measure.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> No, because I tend to update my "rollback" snapshot after I've done a full-scan of my system. <-QUOTE}

That is interesting, Tony.
I have the habbit of 'updating rollbacks' by first restoring from archive/image and than implementing the desired updates.
And then refresh the archive/image, because I want to be sure that the archive/image isn't updated with 'features' that I forgot about.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> If a person can keep and maintain a clean Snapshot, then all Snapshots updated with THAT Snapshot are also clean. <-QUOTE}

I see your point, Acadia.

But even with 'quarantained snapshots', at some point in time you need to open your probably infected documents.
And if your security software didn't catch the potential disaster, what does that quarantain do for you?

[TonyW]

{QUOTE-> I have the habbit of 'updating rollbacks' by first restoring from archive/image and than implementing the desired updates. <-QUOTE}I don't use any archive image to restore from. I do have a baseline image of the system from June 2002, which thankfully I haven't yet had to use.

[Acadia]

Tony, we all have different ways of using this incredibly flexible program. I update one of my ten bootable Snapshots, and six unbootable Snapshots, AT LEAST once a day. I can see why this Data Anchoring would be so valuable to others and have stated so. When it comes to my security considerations it's just that I want all of my Snapshots to be COMPLETELY unconnected to one another, but I can definitely see why others would not; Data Anchoring is a very thoughtful feature of this program. :)

Acadia

[Acadia]

{QUOTE-> your probably infected documents.
<-QUOTE}
?? Where would they have come from?

Acadia

[TonyW]

{QUOTE-> I update one of my ten bootable Snapshots, and six unbootable Snapshots, AT LEAST once a day. I can see why this Data Anchoring would be so valuable to others and have stated so. When it comes to my security considerations it's just that I want all of my Snapshots to be COMPLETELY unconnected to one another, but I can definitely see why others would not; Data Anchoring is a very thoughtful feature of this program. :) <-QUOTE}Another point to mention is that if you have a great deal of HD space, such as you have previously said you have, doing it the way you do things isn't a major problem, but others who don't have that luxury seek other ways of using this great program. The promised snapshot compression Todd hinted at recently may change ways of using this program for that latter group of users. :)

[Peter2150]

Wilbertnl

First I would take everything you know about imaging and throw it out when approaching FDISR. From reading your posts I am not even sure if you have created a second disk snapshot(I hope this isn't the case) or if you are just creating archives. The archives are a supplement, that is nice, but the real point is the snapshots on the drive themselves.

Acadia

In many ways I agree with you. Just it's handy, I feel safe, and also it keeps me from duplicating 2gb of stuff.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> I don't use any archive image to restore from. I do have a baseline image of the system from June 2002, which thankfully I haven't yet had to use. <-QUOTE}

How then do you handle harddisk failure?

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> ... From reading your posts I am not even sure if you have created a second disk snapshot(I hope this isn't the case) or if you are just creating archives. ... <-QUOTE}
I have created a copy of the initial installation, I have installed windows from scratch into an empty snapshot, I have created and updated archives on an external drive. I have restored from that external archive into an existing snapshot to undo some software test.
I have familiarized myself with data anchoring by testing this in the several snapshots. I was happily surprised to see that the anchored data was availble in the empty snapshot, while ISR wasn't yet installed.

Currently I have a frozen OEM snapshot (and archived), a work snapshot (and archived), a game/test snapshot, and waiting an empty snapshot for another fresh installation.

What I still want to test is recovery from archives after harddisk failure.
I do want to familiarize myself with all the features and limits.

[TonyW]

{QUOTE-> How then do you handle harddisk failure? <-QUOTE}As I said previously, I have a baseline image of the system at factory level. All my important documents are backed up. In the event of a HD failure, I'd suppose I'd get a new HD, restore the image and documents onto that new drive.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> As I said previously, I have a baseline image of the system at factory level. All my important documents are backed up. In the event of a HD failure, I'd suppose I'd get a new HD, restore the image and documents onto that new drive. <-QUOTE}

Sorry for asking, my expertise is misunderstanding: does your solution mean that in case of 'new harddisk' you are going back to the installation of June 2002?

[TonyW]

{QUOTE-> Sorry for asking, my expertise is misunderstanding: does your solution mean that in case of 'new harddisk' you are going back to the installation of June 2002? <-QUOTE}Yes, basically, that would be right, but in this day and age of fast DSL it's not a problem to update specific software, and, as I say, the critical data is backed up and so easily restored.