backup experimenting error

[Pants]

Until now I've never tested restoring a "full" system backup. I've only read about this stuff in books.

I decided to test this on my computer. On Windows 7 Professional 64bit, I ran the 'back up and restore' utility. Instead of letting Windows 'decide' for me, I chose the "let me choose" option. I selected the entire C drive, including libraries from my user account, with no 'image' included.

Backup completed successfully. Next I loaded up an old image I made using Clonezilla. After the old image was installed I booted up Windows and restored the backup I made.

Everything looks messed up. It doesn't look anything like it did. Lot of programs are missing, although it does look like user data files have been restored.

What did I do wrong? If I wanted to get back to where I was before messing with the computer should I have allowed windows to include an 'image' in the backup, when the backup was made?

 

[Markverhyden]

What you did will almost certainly result in failure for M$ systems. They are not the same as the *nix's.

What you tried works great, for the most part, in the OS X world but that is because its a *nix. In the M$ world you can use something like Storage Server backups to restore the machine. But that is basically a image restore. Otherwise you need to do a OS restore, virgin or image, then load apps and restore files, settings, etc.

 

[Pants]

None of my virtual disk images work either. I had Oracle installed with Vista, Windows 8, and Windows 8.1 all on separate virtual disks and none of them will boot now.

 

[Pants]

This article helps clarify what I did wrong

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/How-does-Windows-choose-which-files-to-back-up

If you don't opt for Windows to save an "image", then the only files backed up are data files (documents, pictures, music..etc, no program data), whether you let windows "choose", or you choose a drive/directory yourself.

 

[red12049]

Until now I've never tested restoring a "full" system backup. I've only read about this stuff in books.

I decided to test this on my computer. On Windows 7 Professional 64bit, I ran the 'back up and restore' utility. Instead of letting Windows 'decide' for me, I chose the "let me choose" option. I selected the entire C drive, including libraries from my user account, with no 'image' included.

Backup completed successfully. Next I loaded up an old image I made using Clonezilla. After the old image was installed I booted up Windows and restored the backup I made.

Everything looks messed up. It doesn't look anything like it did. Lot of programs are missing, although it does look like user data files have been restored.

What did I do wrong? If I wanted to get back to where I was before messing with the computer should I have allowed windows to include an 'image' in the backup, when the backup was made?

And now you know why, in the other thread, I said boot disc with alternate operating system, not within Windows.

Aren't you glad you experimented with your own system, rather than an important customer?

Congrats for taking the time to learn.

Rick

 

[Pants]

DEFINITELY glad I tried this on my own system, but my failure in restoring the backup is an example of why I'm doing this. Some subjects in computing are difficult to understand without real experimentation. However, I actually did do a thorough study of general backup procedures in SMB about a year ago, but haven't had a chance to put some of it into practice (before rolling out my bus...very very soon now).


I do have my stuff backed up btw.

 

[Sterling Archer]

That's a real tough way to learn something so kudos and thanks for sharing with the forum.
Image or clone your drive if you absolutely have to experiment on your own kit. If your drive had just died anyway it would seem (from your post) that you have no backup for your own stuff. If your main work pc is down it could cost $$$

Failure is always a learning experience. You should know how something will look if the process was done improperly. That way you know what you're seeing when you see it.

 

[Larry Sabo]

One should always restore to a different drive than the "source." It's also a good idea to assume that your last drive image will be corrupted when you most need it, so have a plan B. For example, image to alternate media with a different imaging program on a regular basis.

Sometimes, imaging programs that have appeared to work fine for years suddenly fail. Acronis has done that to me, where one of the incremental images, or the base image, became corrupted. Took a lot of work to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Sorry about trashing your main system. But this is why you test with systems you can afford to lose. VMs or a spare system you have just for testing with.

For the kind of backup you seem to desire I would be looking at an image based backup. Macrium Reflect is free and excellent for this. And it's paid version has more features including the ability to restore to different hardware or into a VM.

ShadowProtect while not free is also good for this.

 

[glricht]

My rule of thumb when I'm doing any type of backup/restore:

1. Backup the source HD
2. Replace the source HD with a spare HD
3. Restore to the spare HD
4. Boot from the spare HD and see how it goes
5. If not right, put the original HD back in and try again

This is what I do ever since I inadvertently trashed one of my office PC's HD. Cleaning up after one's own mistakes is a great learning experience!

 

[Markverhyden]

Many people as well as organizations don't do things correctly until they have been burned.

Back when I did support work for the DCAA I asked the regional NOC once if they tested backups (we had a missing data issue on a workstation). They said no. About a year later I was discussing things with one of the techs and he said he was tied up testing the previous weeks server backups. Apparently another region had a server failure and none of the backups for it actually worked. So now they test every single server backup as soon as it comes in from a branch office.

Of course we all know the IRS meticulously adheres to this process.