Back up

[cthomas]

When I Back up IMatch is there a way to set it where it will backup my images in my IMatch database?

[Richard]

It depends on what you mean by "my images". You can set it so that your cached images are backed up.

[Mario]

If you mean by "backup" that you run the Pack & Go Utility: This will not backup your image files. It can optionally include the cache files, but that's not recommended.

Please see the help for Pack & Go for more information.
Definitely see the help topic in Backup for information about how to backup your system.
To backup your images, include them in your daily backup routine. If you have no backup routine (you use neither the built-in backup in Windows or a solution like TrueImage) you should do!

[cthomas]

If you mean by "backup" that you run the Pack & Go Utility: This will not backup your image files. It can optionally include the cache files, but that's not recommended.

Please see the help for Pack & Go for more information.
Definitely see the help topic in Backup for information about how to backup your system.
To backup your images, include them in your daily backup routine. If you have no backup routine (you use neither the built-in backup in Windows or a solution like TrueImage) you should do!

I use TrueImage to backup all of my pictures.. And it has saved me five or six times.

[afengler]

I use TrueImage to backup all of my pictures.. And it has saved me five or six times.

Same here. Solid piece of software.

Alf

[Ferdinand]

I use TrueImage to backup all of my pictures.. And it has saved me five or six times.

Same here. Solid piece of software.

+1, although later versions are bloated.

[Joe Austin]

Another True Image user.  In ATI2015 they actually removed lot of the extraneous features of earlier versions.

[JohnZeman]

Another True Image user.  In ATI2015 they actually removed lot of the extraneous features of earlier versions.

I would hope so.  I installed the trial version of 2014 last spring and the installation process corrupted my C: drive making it unusable.  I didn't know that right away, it wasn't until I was prompted to reboot after the installation process, that's when Windows told me there was no system drive available.

Fortunately I do regular cloning of my C: drive so I was back up and running quickly with a spare I had.  The corrupt drive wasn't physically bad, I was able to repair and clone it again, and I'm using it right now but without True image.

So at the moment I'm kind of soured on TrueImage but I might give it another try some time, but not unless I have another just cloned spare drive handy just in case.

[ColinIM]

I've used Macrium Reflect now for over two years, after trying many of the alternatives.

I used TrueImage (TI) from version 7.0 (in 2003) until TI "2010", but gave up on it in 2011.  I was too afraid to risk installing an upgrade, during that awful, shaky, wobbly era when they gave almost no credible response to some serious, User-reported issues.

Macrium Reflect has got a vibrant User Forum, and the development team run a close second to Mario (in my opinion) for reacting quickly and positively to User queries and Feature Requests.  I can vouch personally for their determination to stick with problem until they're resolved; I had a one-to-one dialogue with them as they helped me diagnose a poorly-matched USB3 PCIe interface card plugged into my motherboard.

For those of us unafraid of a bit of scripting, Macrium Reflect can be made to sing and dance, and it even includes an XML-script editor to fine tune its backup tasks.  (I've no other connection to the Macrium product or company. I'm just glad to have a well-supported backup solution that works (obviously!) and which lets me 'manage' it - however I choose to.)

Colin P.

[Ferdinand]

TBH (to be honest), I'm still using the ATI version before 2010 (i.e. V11), since I was scared of upgrades as well.  This version isn't supposed to support Win7, but it's working for me.  I saw a lot of bad traffic on various forums about versions post 2010.  I've purchased 2013 & 2014 upgrades when they were on special, but not used them in production, as I had problems when testing a restore of the OS partition.  I think that was the 2013 version.  My brother runs 2014 without any issues.  I really regret not buying the upgrade to 2010, as it was the last decent version, although perhaps 2015 might be ok if they removed all the bloat.

I've used Macrium free to clone a drive when nothing else worked.  I might look at the paid version.  Thanks.

[jcldl]

I used True Image until 2010. Since I use "Shadow Protect" and I must say it is the best backup software I ever had. Backups (total, incremental, differential) Have  always been perfect and I never had a problem with restore.

[Carlo Didier]

Used version 2014 of TrueImage some time, but for file backups it was just too messy an complicated. The new user interface in version 2015 is total crap. Very slow and unresponsive (written in Java ...?). And the features are a laugh. It's like Apple software. Computing for dummies by reducing functionalities.
I now use Crashplan for my online and local backups (to USB disk and a NAS). Works like a charm, though it's user interface is also a bit complicated, but the possibilities are enormous.
I only use my copy of Trueimage now for offline disk images (by booting it from a USB stick).

[ChrisMatch]

I am using SyncBackPro which I originally bought because of its SmartSync feature but now love for its flexibility.
My main backup is a two stage backup to external USB hard disks which is easy enough to not get lazy 

[dcb]

I am using SyncBackPro which I originally bought because of its SmartSync feature but now love for its flexibility.
My main backup is a two stage backup to external USB hard disks which is easy enough to not get lazy 

I use SyncBack as well. Do you have it verifying files? Useful as with many thousands, they don't always copy correctly. It may be one bit that's unnoticeable, or it's that one bit that causes a file to fail.

[Menace]

SyncBack SE for the most cases.

[ColinIM]

(....)
I use SyncBack as well. Do you have it verifying files? (....)

Hi dcb,

Verifying after backup ... absolutely yes!

I'm from the school of thought that says "a backup is not a backup until it has been verified".

(....) as with many thousands, they don't always copy correctly. It may be one bit that's unnoticeable, or it's that one bit that causes a file to fail.

Exactly true.

I have used SyncBackSE successfully to copy whole folder structures between hard drives installed on different computers (sometimes to internal drives and sometimes to external drives on the destination computer), but ... to endorse your second point dcb ... once in a while, just occasionally, SyncBackSE will report that its verification of one (rarely more than one) of the copied files has failed at the 'CRC sumcheck' phase.

SyncBackSE tells me which files did not successfully transfer and I can then run a smaller copy task to re-try just the failed file(s), or I can copy it/them using Windows Explorer - before I, once again, verify that these left-over files are indeed identical.

So yes, even though I invest in top-grade hard drives and even though I try hard to build reliable computers and keep them in good order, I still get once-in-blue-moon bit-errors on larger scale file transfers.

(To echo a post I made recently on a Macrium Reflect Forum) When we transfer our millions and millions and millions of data bits between devices, we do after all entrust each bit to be moved through a daisy-chain of USB and/or SATA and/or Ethernet and/or TCP/IP interfaces.  Errors do occur. Errors are indeed rare, but they are not 'never'. Exactly as you say dcb.

Nobody is (yet) claiming to be able to move our data between A and B with 100% reliability. This entire industry accepts that data-transfer errors will occur, hopefully rarely, seemingly at random even on top-grade equipment, and that - unless we look at and check (verify) our transfers - some errors will sneak through unseen, causing grief and "mysterious" problems to pop to the surface days later, or weeks later, or some months or years afterwards!

To add one last evangelising note here to anyone who doubts the importance of backup verification (thank you for reading this far!) - just imagine how powerful it would be as a marketing message if a backup software company could boast that "with our backup product, that slow, slow verification phase of your backups can be omitted at last ...".  On the contrary, every backup program available includes an option (optional for the optimistic user) to follow each (non-trivial) backup phase with a slow but sensible Verify phase.  They don't invite us to cross our fingers and hope for error-free backups.  They give us the tools to be certain that our backups are in fact, viable, trustworthy copies of our data.

(End of over-long rant to (I suspect) an already-persuaded IMatch audience!!!)

Colin P.

(Postscript: For my whole-disk backups I use Macrium Reflect, but I use SyncBackSE for my smaller (usually smaller) file-based transfers.)

[dcb]

... once in a while, just occasionally, SyncBackSE will report that its verification of one (rarely more than one) of the copied files has failed at the 'CRC sumcheck' phase.

SyncBackSE tells me which files did not successfully transfer and I can then run a smaller copy task to re-try just the failed file(s), or I can copy it/them using Windows Explorer - before I, once again, verify that these left-over files are indeed identical.

So yes, even though I invest in top-grade hard drives and even though I try hard to build reliable computers and keep them in good order, I still get once-in-blue-moon bit-errors on larger scale file transfers.

I tend to get errors on large files 2+GB. I have a number of these where I've converted DV tapes to AVI and have split the 13GB/hour into more manageable pieces. Out of 90 such files, if I'm copying to a new drive I'd expect 10-12 failures on the first copy. Some take multiple attempts. I don't use anything except Syncback to copy them again. Let it do the work rather than Windows Explorer. I think mine is doing more than CRC checking as well. It copies the file to the destination, calculates some sort of checksum, then reads the source file again to make sure they match.

What it all comes down to is that whatever backup program you are using make sure somehow you are confident it is backing up to your level of fear.

[Aubrey]

I use allway sync to keep a copy of all images on a second disk. I also use Backblaze as a cloud backup. Costs about 50 US $ per year. I currently have some 1.3Tb backed up. I retrieve files periodically to check it's really there. Never had any issues in some 4 years.
Aubrey.

[sinus]

Colin, hi

Today I downloaded Macrium Reflect to test it, if I understood you correct, you use this piece of software successfully (and with a good support).

We have to decide there some things, I decided:

Auto-Verify: yes
Compression: medium
Intelligent Copy: yes

and

Differential backups (after the full backup)

Is this ok for you?
So, if I understand correctly (the backup is still running, time until end: 2 hours, 55min), after the backup, I have to make daily a backup (not fully) and in the target source, I cannot see there my images 1:1, but one or more compressed files.
To restore something, I have to use the same software again.

Before I used RichCopy, what did a fully backup from folders and after rerunning, it changed or appended only new image or edited files, BUT it was a 1:1 backup, means, I could simple open the backup drive and (for example) copy 1 or more single files, what I liked very much.

With Macrium, I think, this is not possible?
I come on Macrium, because I changed to Win 10 and you and Mario works also with this.
And it seems to be a good program.

Thanks for listening.

[Mario]

Macrium does not backup individual files, it backs up an image of your disk (the RAW data). Usually you do a full backup and then incrementals. If you swap disks, you need to create full backups on both disks of course.

The idea of imaging is that it is much faster than copying files, and saves lots of disk space because it does not copy all changed files, only the sectors on the disk which have changed.

To restore files from a backup, you "mount" it as a drive and then you can access it from Windows Explorer like a regular disk. You choose which day to mount etc. Very comfortable.

If the concepts of imaging and mounting backups as drives are new to you, check out the Macrium documentation. It is important to understand how to get your data back in the worst case, how to create a boot media with Macrium to restore your disk when it has to be replaced, how to access individual backup files etc.

Don't think that you have a backup unless you actually tested that you can restore from it.

[sinus]

Thanks, Mario,

Very gentle, that you answer even such a "trivial" thing, while you are full in the other 5.5-stuff.

I will do, like you say, I will study the help and I will try to restore some files.

Hm, I guess, I can also change still from differential to incremental. Because just now I let create the first full-backup.

So, I will read more and  then see.

Thanks again!

[JohnZeman]

I'm in Key West on vacation now and am very busy watching bikinis but I'd like to add my vote for Macrium Reflect as well.  I've been using it for almost a year now and I am VERY happy with it.

Markus in case you're wondering how you can use the same software when your hard drive has gone bad, you need to create a rescue disk or flash drive (that's what I did) with Macrium Reflect.  Then if your computer hard drive goes bad you boot the computer up on the rescue disk (or flash stick), Macrium Reflect is installed on that so it can restore your files from your backup drive to a new drive.

You can also restore an entire hard drive, or individual files.  The latest version of Reflect supports what is called Incrementals Forever, meaning you don't have to do a periodic full image or files backup.  IMO Reflect is outstanding software with outstanding support.

[thrinn]

Macrium does not backup individual files, it backs up an image of your disk

That depends on the type of backup you choose. There is also an option to backup individual files and folders. But even then the backup is stored in a propietary container format, so you have to use Macrium Reflect to mount this container to an drive letter (exactly as Mario wrote). Just use the context menu in the Windows Explorer on your backup file (*.mrbak), choose "Explore backup", assign a drive letter. Then you can access individual files in your backup.

[sinus]

Hey John and Thorsten
Thanks for your realy interesting inputs. I will try this all.
It gives a good feeling, when (known) people gives some advise.
Thanks! 

[ColinIM]

(We overlapped Marcus while I was typing this ...)

(....)
Don't think that you have a backup unless you actually tested that you can restore from it.

Yes! Wise words indeed.

(....)
(....) The latest version of Reflect supports what is called Incrementals Forever (....)

I now use Incrementals Forever for my daily Macrium backups, with a rotating cycle of 10 incrementals (we can choose a smaller or higher number than 10).  I'm sure you'll understand me referring you (as others have done) to the Macrium documentation - and also to the Macrium Support Forum - rather than attempting to summarise all of the possible variations here!

Following the usual, initial first backup of your disk, which can indeed take over two hours to complete, I find that each later 'run' of the 10-cycle Incrementals Forever to be satisfyingly fast.  It's a very clever scheme, although the process of 'merging' the daisy-chain of incrementals (which will be stored on your backup device) makes your backup device work quite hard for a minute or so, depending of course on how many incrementals you've chosen to maintain in your cycle.

My favourite fact with the Incrementals Forever scheme is that the number of backup files which comprise each N-incremental backup stays the same - so by keeping a quick check that the overall size of the set of files is not filling your backup device, we don't need to worry about managing a growing number of 'historical' incremental (or optionally differential) backup files.

My least favourite fact with the Incrementals Forever scheme is that the Last Modified Time & Date assigned to all of the incremental backup files (10 files in my case) becomes the same - give or take a few minutes - so that I can no longer use those Dates & Times on those files to tell me which days the various backups were related to.  The whole chain of files is indeed modified each time we run an Incrementals Forever backup.

... and stop me here ... I could write a whole book ...

Best of luck Marcus. I've no doubt you'll get Macrium Reflect to meet your needs exactly.
Colin P.

[sinus]

Hey Colin
Thanks a lot for jumping in!

Very interesting and I will surely try this new possibility (what John described and you now deeper) with the incrementals forever.

Btw: I am very sure, that you would write a very good book with deep insight of the whole stuff 

[Mario]

My PC booted this morning and the RAID controller told me that one of my raid sets (I have two) is degraded. This means that one disk died between shutting down the PC last night and booting it this morning. Thanks to my RAID I can continue to work. I have already ordered a new disk via Amazon and it will be delivered tomorrow morning. Then I will swap the disks and the RAID controller will rebuild the array while I continue to work.

Thankfully I have a proper Macrium backup in place as well, just in case. If the other disk of the RAID array dies as well before I can rebuild the RAD, only the Macrium backup will help.

[sinus]

My PC booted this morning and the RAID controller told me that one of my raid sets (I have two) is degraded. This means that one disk died between shutting down the PC last night and booting it this morning. Thanks to my RAID I can continue to work. I have already ordered a new disk via Amazon and it will be delivered tomorrow morning. Then I will swap the disks and the RAID controller will rebuild the array while I continue to work.

Thankfully I have a proper Macrium backup in place as well, just in case. If the other disk of the RAID array dies as well before I can rebuild the RAD, only the Macrium backup will help.

Phew, alway is something, what we must do. 

Good, that you have such a good backup-strategie! I want not think about, if all your IMatch-source-code would be gone. Phew, not thinking ... 

[Mario]

The IMatch source code is backed up in several ways, from local disks to remote disks to cloud storage.
The first thing this morning was to backup everything important to an USB 3.0 128 GB stick. Just to have yet another copy.
I'm paranoid when it comes to backup - from experience.