I have software, to protect my software, to protect my software,etc.

What would be the best way to test an image of XP operating system in a pc w/only one hard drive.
I'm still really new to this and have a lot to learn.
Thanks.
Hugger

 

Prior to Pete giving the definitive answer,just use the recovery CD or whatever your app calls it.-but where are you storing the image-must be on a different partition to the C partition.

I know Pete firmly believes in restoring every image as verification,which is ideal-however probably the chances are the verified image should be OK if using a reliable app like SP

edit; if you dont already have a backup app and want a lot of details-suggest you start a new thread.

 

Simply said anything on your disk if toasted will lost,included all your wonderfull images.If not stupid buy yourself a second or an external USB drive.

Restore is all or nothing so better safe important files before restore to another part.or better yet to a second drive. Then the worst can happen if it fails is a reinstall.

I must admit that doing it the very first time is a daunting challence at best,but sadly there's no other way to check if you are REALLY protected.

If the restore goes without a hiccup and you hear the iritating windows welcome sound again,your joy has no bounderies,i promise you !!

 

Hello Hugger,

Disk imaging is widely used in the corporate world as a rapid deployment system, but never as a backup methodology, only as a way to install pre configured systems... Primarily due to the dynamic nature of data which is ever changing rendering disk image obsolete the minute you completed it and used your system. Also it is a natural way of installing the same software configuration on a large # of identical computer at hardware level, as IT often purchases large quantities of the same machines at each new procurement run...

This being said, I have long stopped using disk imaging software... or to be frank sometimes I keep a single image of my original installed setup for rapid restore, but I will never use this method as a backup protocol for daily use. I personally favor backing up my essentials to an external hard disk by using a good backup software. If you have issues on your hard disk that is aggregating, like program file corruptions, or viruses and rootkits, you will simply image this issue and re install the problem on next restore of the image. Personally I think it better to simply focus on the latest data sets, which is usually very small for most users. This you could easily do via an online backup service or on a CDR or DVDR... And it can be automated to be done in the background, it can be encrypted (so if someone steals the thing its locked out) and it can also do the backup to a server in background...

My favorite backup software to do this is from this site; http://www.genie-soft.com/ and it is what I am using myself...

To protect the rest of your system, you would be better off using light virtualisation which requires no imaging at all thus it's easier...
Also there are many advantages to a full re install of your operating system should you have to do it, as it gives you the opportunity to download all the latest drivers, for your hardware and fix little issues that had crept up unnoticed within the internals of your operating system...

Just my two bits!

 

Yes just you two bits !!

 

I like those percentages.

Don't you agree, Pete, that the advertised ease of operation of ATI is in reality far more complex (for the average user) and time consuming if one wishes to fully validate each back up image? I mean, after you restore the back up to test it and find that it is fine, then you have to restore the drive image that you will be using.

It's like an eternal restore loop!

 

If i was in a position to advise others about security/protection,number ONE would be to buy a good imaging program. Its your backbone, and suplement it with the things you like.

 

You didn't even read what I wrote... They are imaging, only not for a backup... Also typically in a corporate setting the "Data" which is what is important here, usually sits in a directory on a server not on the users hard disk. All data on a users hard disk is usually do at your own risk, and is most often done against corporate policies, as they want you to keep your important data on the server, so it can be centrally backed up, kept secure, and easily managed...

Ask any network pro, and they will explain this to you... Also do not confuse data backup, and system recovery as they are two completely separate issues, and should be handled that way...

 

You're right, but Storagecraft is positioning Shadowprotect as a solution to both bare metal recovery and data backup.

 

Right, try and use it on a busy server... What I mean here relates to data backup redundancy... Software backup working as imaging do not adequately address those issues in my opinion... RAID already does this to some degree but I like my backup somewhere else than on the same box for a range of reasons... Also what about generational file modifications ans so on, and I need it accessible from any point if necessary and in real time. Grandfathering works, it's cheap and it's easy to do via online automation these days...

However to comeback to those that are non corporate a software backup is still the appropriate counter measure to loosing your data to some freak computer crash as it's to be backed up to either an external disk or DVD or even somewhere on the internet, doing this it does provide superior protection.

Besides Microsoft new "Home Server" is now positioning itself as a real time fully automated backup/multimedia server that images the entire hard disk of every PC in your house via the home network in real time, as well as time lapse, together with incremental file backups, and that has the potential to kick the pant bottom to a lot of products out there... if only they can make it work properly...

 

See it yourself

 

This is exactly the recommended practice where I work. We have several remote drives where all employees have access to at least one of them to store their sensitive data.

They do use imaging software to restore machines that are beyond fixing due to viruses or other types of data corruption, but I'm not really sure exactly how it works, as it's a different department off site. I believe it was used when we went from W2K to XP Pro. COE's are routinely pushed over the network to apply updates to all machines.

 

Thank you lucas,

I am no longer managing data centers and servers in general these days, but this product looks relatively decent. However any new product such as these need to be evaluated in server farms with a sustained utilization base to demonstrate it's stability and effectiveness... I have no prior knowledge of this product other than having done a bit of browsing on their site... So I have no opinion on those products...

 

RAID is bad. RAID 1 is the only acceptable solution, because it's transparent.

Yup, LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) is the way to go. ZFS is the filesystem of the future.

 

A recent review (SOHO)

 

Hey thanks lucas,
nice review...

 

Yes, please do (test on busy servers)! I regularly ask people to perform such a test with our ShadowProtect product, and other similar products (Symantec BESR, Acronis True Image, etc) to see who can reliably backup their systems under heavy load. Most people don't bother to test. Those that do will be very surprised by the results.

The test I suggest is mostly intended for IT types. Home/end users please ignore this.

Perform the following test for all products under comparison (ShadowProtect, Symantec BESR, True Image, etc):

1) Start with a clean SBS 2003 with Exchange, on which NONE of the above products have EVER been installed.

2) Check the Exchange database to ensure that it's good (not corrupt) before beginning tests

3) Run chkdsk on the volume containing the exchange database to ensure that the file system is not corrupt

4) Install the disaster-recovery backup product for this particular test

5) Configure the disaster-recovery backup product to backup the volume containing the Exchange database on a frequent schedule, using incremental imaging capability, preferably every 15 minutes if possible. Do *NOT* stop any Exchange/SQL/etc services prior to the backup - let Microsoft's VSS framework quiesce the apps (that's the purpose of VSS, after all) - if a backup app isn't written correctly to work with VSS then while its maker may claim to support VSS it may give a different message in its support forums or knowledge base (such as suggesting that you actually stop your exchange/sql/etc services prior to each backup - ridiculous - businesses can't afford to regularly take these services offline).

6) Use LoadSim to place a constant heavy simulated load on the Exchange Server

7) Wait a few hours, allowing the backup product to generate a base/full and around 10 incremental images

Stop LoadSim

9) Stop the backup job

10) Test the Exchange database to see if the original database is now corrupt (before restoring anything)

11) Run chkdsk on the volume containing the exchange database to see if the file system is corrupt (before restoring anything)

12) Now restore each point-in-time, starting with the base, and then progressively restoring each incremental, and after each restore operation test the exchange database to see if it's corrupt and test the filesystem to see if it's corrupt.

13) Report the ghastly results

These tests will reveal if the product corrupts your original data volume (an unpardonable sin) or if its backups are actually useless for restore purposes.

A few important things to note if you do run these tests:

1) Before beginning the tests, you will need to enable the Exchange VSS writer on SBS 2003 as Microsoft does not enable this writer by default for SBS. More detail here: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q838183

2) You should apply the latest service packs and updates for Windows Server 2003 as Microsoft's VSS framework has some bugs in non-service packed versions.

3) You should never install ShadowProtect and True Image at the same time. True Image's snapman.sys driver has a bug which will cause it to blue screen (usually) your machine if ShadowProtect is installed at the same time. Worse, the True Image uninstaller often will not remove snapman.sys, which means you'll have to manually remove it if you aren't rolling back the machine to a clean state as I suggested in the first step. Manual removal of snapman.sys requires you to unregister it as a PnP filter on the disk and volume device classes. If you merely remove the snapman.sys file then your system will not boot because the PnP Manager will try to load snapman.sys as a filter on all disk and volume devices and as if it can't find snapman.sys then it will panic and BSOD the OS. Like I say, though, it's best to start all such tests from a clean baseline where none of the reviewed products have ever been installed. See this post for steps for manual uninstall of snapman.sys: http://forum.storagecraft.com/Community/forums/p/358/1517.aspx#1517

4) If you perform similar stress tests backing up SQL Server, you should first update SQL Server with a hotfix or else you may receive SQL VDI errors in the event log. Unfortunately you have to phone in to MS to obtain the hotfix (KB934396). See : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/934396/en-us

5) When Microsoft's VSS framework is used by a backup application, the VSS framework will "quiesce" applications which are VSS-aware (such as Exchange 2003), causing these applications to flush their data to a clean state and to pause momentarily while the volume snapshot is established. Unfortunately, VSS is a rather complex collection of components and services (VSS Writers, VSS Requestors, VSS Providers, and the VSS Service itself), and if any of these components misbehave then VSS may not work properly. Some VSS Requestors (backup applications) are notorious for leaving various VSS components in bad states (amazingly ntbackup.exe is one such application). One can view the states of the writers and providers using the commands "vssadmin list writers" and "vssadmin list providers". It's important to understand that if VSS fails to work properly, ShadowProtect will still perform the backup (just without VSS's assistance). Whether or not ShadowProtect used VSS for a given backup can be viewed in the job's detailed log. It's also important to know that some ShadowProtect jobs allow you to specify that you do NOT want to use VSS for some backups (for some incrementals, for instance). If you are backing up Exchange then it's recommended that you use VSS for *all* backups - make sure this is set in the schedule page of the ShadowProtect backup job wizard. If Exchange is backed up without assistance from Microsoft's VSS framework (which ShadowProtect will do if VSS is in a bad state) then in such cases the Exchange database may be captured in a mid-transaction (dirty) state. Don't confuse "dirty" with "corrupt," which are very different things. A dirty database is not a bad database - it's just one that needs to apply completed transactions from its logs and discard any partial transactions. Corrupt means that, well, the database's own metadata (and also possibly data) are messed up.

6) Exchange's log files and your .edb files can be in different directories, and even on different volumes. If they are on different volumes then it is critical that you configure the backup job to backup all volumes on which .edb and log files exist as part of the same single job. This will ensure that all of the backup images are based on a multi-volume snapshot which atomically captures the states of the combined volumes at one moment in time.

7) Whenever you test for integrity and checksum tests you must include the log files along with the .edb

Exchange's VSS Writer will issue errors, and informational entries, in the event log. Check there to see if the Exchange Writer is working or failing.

9) eseutil /mh isn't really a very interesting test. It doesn't actually test the integrity of the database. More interesting are the eseutil /K and eseutil /G tests. In fact, if Microsoft's Exchange team's blog is to be trusted, we should note that eseutil /mh will always show the database as being dirty even if VSS is used. The solution is to mount the database and allow the logs to replay, then dismount the database and it should be clean. Then do full integrity tests with eseutil /K and eseutil /G

"Whether you do the backup with generic shadow copy [VSS] capabilities or via the streaming API, the database will be "crash consistent" - meaning, it is marked as being in "Dirty Shutdown" state and must have log files replayed into it after restoration before it can be mounted. This "Dirty shutdown" state can be seen if you dump the database header using ESEUTIL /mh command. When databases do not require any logs to start, they are marked as being in "Clean shutdown" state. Please note here that if you restore a full online backup of the database and let the database go through the "recovery" (meaning the database replays the logs that were restored plus possibly some logs that were already on the disk) - the database will get into the "Clean shutdown" state without user intervention."

If you actually take the time to do your due diligence and perform these tests, you'll be truly amazed at the results. And if you actually DO care about your data, you really should run these tests if you are considering these products for enterprise class image backup.

 

Wow, great response, and I certainly hope many with access to loaded corporate assets will take up your challenge!

 

Howdy Guy

Dont think the home user is going to be able to get much value out of a corporate backup strategy,interesting as it is.
After all,a home user may have almost as much need to be able to quickly restore his non data system,usually the accumulation of years of searching,trial and error and optimising the set up, as his data.

A good backup app,such as SP,can backup both,on the average,just as fast as a data only backup app.and just as reliably.
"On the average" means the time averaged for the initial image ,plus the incremental images ,which take maybe 30 seconds.
This largely make separate data backups redundant,but occasionaly I use both,to take into account any change in data between images.
My favorite is Karens Replicator,simple and fast.

Of course,a must is to archive the images on a separate disk.
As Ive had a few HDD failures,I'm playing it safe and use both an internal and external for this purpose.
As the external is portable, in theory it should be taken with you when you leave the house,to guard against complete loss of all records in case of a fire or burglary,but of course this never happens ,even when on holidays!
So there you are,you are never safe from that .001% chance of disaster
.

 

Bonjour Hairy Coo,

Having a backup strategy that comprises redundancy is the prime directive!
Also, just for a note on external HD, for added portability you can now get external USB 2.0 devices that u can use to build with the largest Laptop hard disks... Hitachi and samsung already makes Mini SATA laptop HD's in excess of 500 Gig's How's that for portable data storage... It fits in your pocket!

That's half a therabyte of Porn, pirated software and cracked applications for the masses Just imagine how many viruses can fit on one of those!

 

Guy,

Amazing,the advancements in IT.

Thats the main thing I had against the French Revolution-the masses were involved-their taste and mine are diametrically opposed

best Hairy