FDISR - Export/Import

At Peter2150's suggestion, I've been using AJC Active Backup to not only backup but simultaneously archive a number of revisions of files on my Documents Drive.

Furthermore, I use periodic imaging and nightly file-based backup of my Documents Drive. Since my Documents Drive isn't covered by FDISR and can't be "reinstalled" like an OS and programs partition, I obviously back it up and image it more frequently and redundantly than my system partition.

Well, also I have the My Documents folder along with Favorites, Outlook+OE data files, and current purchased software install files and licensing information replicated across all 4 of our desktops and my laptop.

Obviously, that's more than most people would do but it offers alternatives.

 

I still don't have a clear answer to my question.

 

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=763635&postcount=20

 

IMO the right answer is :
If you have only FDISR and two partitions (or more) : system [C:] and data [D:], you don't have a backup
for your data partition [D:], because FDISR works only on your system partition [C:], which means you have only a backup of your system partition [C:] by archiving snapshots on CD/DVD's or an external harddisk.
But you don't have a real backup solution for your data partition [D:] and FDISR won't help you in this case.
I'm talking about a minimum situation here, like member "aigle" suggested.

That's why I keep on saying, that FDISR isn't a replacement for image backup, you need both.

Using more than one backup software, is a matter of belts and braces.
If I use two backup softwares, I'm better of than one who uses only one.
If I use three backup softwares, I'm better of than one who uses only one or two.
But this has nothing to do with backup anymore, that's a personal choice. I only need ATI for both partitions. That's the same as using 1 scanner or 10 scanners.

 

hmm.."ericalbert" did I offend you some way? If so I am sorry, that was not my intention.

 

LOL In no way, that post was a combination of "just kidding" and a serious test.
I don't like half work, so I tried it for real.

 

Your answer is right for you, EricAlbert.

When I think about data backup, I think of a solution where I'm able to retrieve one single file out the the backup solution I use. If needed even several versions of one single file.
I know that ATI 9.x is able to handle one file retrieval, but when you talk about disk imaging software, you usually handle whole partitions or whole disks. That's great for system restore, but not for backup of documents.
I don't consider your option of imaging your data partition a data backup in that sense, I consider that a solution for system restore.

It's fine with me if you feel like you need three or more simultaneous solutions for images and backups.
My world won't fall apart when my data gets lost.

 

As I said, I use ATI only for both partitions.
Peter is the one who likes more than one backup system : ATI and IFW/IFD and Ghost and AJC. In other words : a layered backup LOL.
I will never go that far, ATI is more than enough for me.

 

OK, I guess a more direct answer to the question as asked literally would be: You aren't going to back up ANYTHING because, if you use ONLY FDISR, then by definition you have no backup program to use.

 

You're preaching to the choir from where I sit.

I was specifically catering to Erik's insistence that FDISR is not a backup program and his apparent dissatisfaction with answers some of us posted explaining how we do or would back up our data when it's on a separate partition (not restricting ourselves to the use of only FDISR, violating the literal sense of his question).

If I start from the strict premise that FDISR is NOT a backup program AND I use NO OTHER SOFTWARE, then I can't back up anything, can I ?

I was trying to bring to light that an overly restrictive question can result in an overly restrictive answer. If dialogue has to remain that rigid, I'll just pass, thank you.

 

ErikAlbert,
I know that others have questioned your insistence on using multiple partitions, but let me do it one more time. Why do you insist on partitioning your hard drives?

The reason I ask is not to patronize you, but rather to inquire about using the following method:

Use FDISR with data anchoring for your important data. Use an external HD to export your snapshots and store a backup copy of your important data. This method would require two simultaneous HD failures for you to be screwed. My guess is that this method does not provide for a quick way to restore your system in the event of a HD failure due to the fact that you would have to reinstall Windows and update it. Just wanted to pose the option. Personally I use Image for Windows for that purpose and I understand that you prefer ATI. Since you use ATI, it is probably easier for you to simply image all of your partitions for backup purposes.

Despite your preference for ATI, I still think that you could benefit by using FDISR. For example, when I decide to experiment with a software, I can be fearless because a simple reboot restores my system to the exact way that it was before I installed the experimental software. Using an imaging program could accomplish the same thing, but it would take considerably more time and thus would tend to dissuade one from engaging in such experiment.

Sorry to ramble, but I wanted to present you with my thoughts as they came to mind.

Peter2150,
I agree with your assessment of the article I posted. Actually, I came to a similar conclusion for the same reasons long ago. I simply wanted the option to be known.

 

ATI and IFW are just software names for me, I never work with names, I work with what these softwares DO.
As long ATI doesn't fail and it never did, I have no reasons to change.
I've tested ATI thoroughly, because I didn't trust ATI after reading all these serious troubles with ATI in the Acronis Forums at Wilders. I just wanted to know for myself, if ATI was really a troublemaker or not.
I'm not in love with ATI, I'm in love with what ATI "does" and IFW "does" exactly the same job.
"Love" is too strong for me, because I don't love any software, I just like them if they do their job properly, but English isn't my first language and I can't find a better word.

I already bought FDISR, because it's an interesting software with lots of possibilities and it has something very special, that ATI and IFW don't have : refreshing snapshots. I can't refresh ATI/IFW-images.
ShadowUser/Deepfreeze can't do this either and what both softwares can is also possible in FDISR, when I freeze my active snapshot. That's why I ditched both softwares without even trying them.

For me, it was FDISR or RollbackRx and since RollbackRx isn't as reliable as FDISR, my choice was again easy.
I don't need 30,000 snapshots either and I can create more than 30,000 "Archived Snapshots" with FDISR also, if that would be necessary. So where is the advantage of RollbackRx? Saving space? No, because I can save space by storing Archived snapshots on an external harddisk.
I don't need that many snapshots either and 10 snapshots is more than enough for me.

Concerning separating system from data, I'm 100% convinced that this is the right approach.
I've have worked all my life with ONE partition [C:], just like Peter.
So I know how it is to work with ONE partition and more than ONE partition and I won't change my mind about this anymore.
Peter doesn't know how easy it is to work with TWO partitions, because he never did it in practice, just like I didn't know how easy it is to work with FDISR, because I never used it.
Peter doesn't have to listen to me, he is already satisfied with his way of working.
It's very obvious for me that system and data need a different approach and this isn't the right forum to discuss this separation.

I'm an analyst and I like to think about these things and I learned how to separate problems from one another that have nothing to do with eachother. I also learned how to solve difficult problems by dividing them in smaller problems and to find a solution for each of these smaller problems in order to solve a difficult problem.
I have only one big disadvantage at Wilders, I don't know anything about internet, security and even computers and that's why I make alot of mistakes and when I don't know anything about something, I use my intuition to make the right decisions.
At work, I don't have that problem, because I know almost everything about my applications, but these applications have nothing to do with internet and security.

 

I use ATI and FD-ISR. I have my system and programs on the C: partition and my data on the D: partition. I only backup the C: partition with ATI. I anchor my Desktop and My Favorites with FD-ISR.

There is a program called Second Copy which automatically backs up my data to the external drive everyday in the background, or on any schedule I want. It does it incrementally only as items change. You can keep as many changes as you want. Check it out.
www.secondcopy.com

 

ErikAlbert,
Please keep in mind that I am not trying to change your mind. The way you manage your system and your data is your business. I was simply wanting to present an alternative for you to consider. It is obvious that you are smart enough to make you own decisions and frankly I do not have a vested interest in the way your manage your system.

Just as you've opened my mind to ATI, a program that I had previously ruled out as being unreliable and overly complicated, I would like to open yours to the posibility of accomplishing your goals without multiple partitions.

Once again, please don't receive this posting as a criticism or anything close. It is merely intended to invoke your consideration of an alternative.

 

Well, I don't think that FD-ISR manages other partitions than C:, and I get the feeling that this is ErikAlbert's concern.
He specifically discusses a separate data partition.

 

Hello Peter,

If I had a mission critical system, I would consider mirroring as solution of preference. Which would mean duplicate hardware.
I would definitely insist on testing the recovery plan from scratch.

 

Yes, you can, ErikAlbert, and actually you can update an ATI image incrementally, which feature I miss in FD-ISR.

http://www.geocities.com/wilbertnl/images/acronis-2.jpg

 

That was indeed my concern. As long you keep everything on one partition [C:], you won't have a problem with FDISR.
My question was a hypothetical one : what will happen if you have two partitions and you have only FDISR as sort of backup?
It all started with "aigle" suggestion and it's worth to talk about it.

My concern is that there are two groups of people discussing FDISR : one-partition-people and more-partition-people
and they look at FDISR in a different way and they answer differently and offer different solutions.
Why would I anchor my data for instance, there is nothing to anchor anymore on partition [C:], because my data is on partition [D:] and this is just one example of these differences. The same with "aigle"'s suggestion, because FDISR can't be used as sort of backup, when you have more than one partition.

Well you got me there wilbernl. Frankly I never saw that window, maybe this window appears, when you choose
incremental backups instead of full backup, which I never tried. I will check it out. Thanks

 

What I understand of FD-ISR is that it's developed with fast system recovery in mind, and the way it does that is with software mirroring. It's called snapshots. Fast system recovery, because the involved system had to pickup the processing of a flow of data as soon as possible. This was focused on handling dynamic data, not static data, the data wasn't on disk.

In case of one partition:
When you don't anchor at all and develop a consistent copy/update schedule to a second disk, you would have a backup solution.
Acadia is using FD-ISR this way, if I understand his information correctly.

In case of anchored data or a separate data partition:
You still need a procedure to backup your data. There are many ways to do that.

I think that you got a couple valid answers from this forum. But maybe you didn't get the answer that you were hoping for?

 

Peter,

Here is what I experienced with ATI:
When you restore a partition from an image, the result is not sectorwise equal to the original, it may be shifted one or two sectors. With consequence that ATI recognizes a change of almost all sectors when it compares with the images in order to decide the increment.
So, what I did was: restore from image, then first create a full image and only after that update/change the 'snapshot'. Only then an ATI incremental update is significant smaller! Sometimes a couple MB.

What I would like to see is that I create a 'mother image', let's call that OEM-installation.
Then I update the 'snapshot' to my liking and only the differences are stored in the incremental update (call it complete).
But then I would like to restore the OEM-installation and update it in a different way, for example prepared for testing purpose.
I would like to be able to make a different incremental update which I then call beta test.

So, the picture would look like this:

OEM-installation (1.2 GB)
|___ complete (0.7 GB)
|___ beta test (0.3 GB)

In this situation I would have 3 options to restore from and it would take 2.2 GB.

What do you think?

 

I only wanted a confirmation of my own answer, that FDISR can't be used as a sort of backup solution for data partition [D:], but that answer is already given in another post. So I got my confirmation.
The only answers I got upto now, were solutions, I didn't ask for solutions, I asked for a confirmation, if I was right or wrong.

This is the answer to my question and confirms that I was right.