The Pros/Cons of volume backups vs file backups

e24ohm

Folks:
This is reaching out of my skill set, so I need some help. I was asked to review items for a backup policy; however, I have read about volume backups and file backups.

To me, I could be misunderstanding – but with the volume copy/backup I am able to do bare-metal restores to the whole machine. The latter would be used with a restore disk to boot, and then I point the machine to the volume backup.

However, if volume backups offer the feature I mentioned. What is the main benefit to perform a file backup (Symantec backup Exec) over the volume backup?

I have found resources that detail each backup in general; however, I have not been able to find anything that really compares and contrasts the two methods.

Any suggestions or help on this matter is greatly appreciated.

demonfurbie

size, a file back up (depending on the software) most likely backs up the files that have been changed since the last full back up

a good policy is to monthly (depending on the total volume) is to do a full back up and daily incremental backups

also monthly do a restore on a test system cause a backup is only good if you can easily restore it

e24ohm

demonfurbie wrote: »

size, a file back up (depending on the software) most likely backs up the files that have been changed since the last full back up

a good policy is to monthly (depending on the total volume) is to do a full back up and daily incremental backups

also monthly do a restore on a test system cause a backup is only good if you can easily restore it

Just so I understand you - you are saying that volume copies are larger? I am reviewing Shadow Protect

Windows backup, disaster recovery and drive image software

and it looks like you can perform normal, incremental and differential backup modes with the software; however, the software is labeled as volume copies.

thanks.

pham0329

size shouldn't be much of an issue as most volume backups allows for incrementals/differetials as well.

Depending on the software though, some volume backup doesn't allow for granular restore. Meaning if you need to restore a file, you're restoring the entire volume.

e24ohm

pham0329 wrote: »

size shouldn't be much of an issue as most volume backups allows for incrementals/differetials as well.

Depending on the software though, some volume backup doesn't allow for granular restore. Meaning if you need to restore a file, you're restoring the entire volume.

However, since it is a volume - you would most likley mount the drive/volume and retrieve what is needed from the mounted drive? Would the drive be mounted as a drive letter or does it depend on the software being used?

higherho

For all our servers we use Symantec System Recovery (weekly backups) and for user files we simply have a script that just copies all our user data to external HDD's (Weekly) that get locked in a safe. The server backups (full images of the C and D drive) are encrypted and get stored off site.

Now if the user does not save their files on the network (we give them 5 to 10 gig of space per user) and they store it all locally? well if I cannot get into the system to pull any of it off then they are out of luck .

instant000

Volume Backups vs File Backups vs Application Backups vs Whole Server Backups vs etc.

Volume Backups - Linked to a Drive
File Backups - Linked to Files
Application Backups - Linked to an Application
Whole Server Backup - Backs up the entirety of the server

Your volume backup may not offer you the entirety of what you need, as it is not taking into account application/service configurations.

Your file backups may not offer the entirety of what you need, as there could be associated application setups/folder paths that point to these files.

Your application backup (such as SQL/Oracle/Exchange) is designed in such a way that it is aware of how the underlying database functionalities of the application work, such that you'll be able to properly recover these.

Whole server backup (the whole flipping thing) is nice and all, as long as you have a compatible hardware platform to run it on (virtualization helps here), however, unless it also includes agents for the underlying applications (such as SQL/Oracle/Exchange) it still may not properly back them up.

Anyway, even with all that said, no matter what backup solution you decide to go with, your backups are totally suspect, and should be verified by testing. (demonfurbie mentioned this earlier). The more often you can successfully restore from your backups, the more you can be sure that you both know how to recover your application, and also that the backups are worthwhile. Also, you can get a realistic picture of "how long" it takes to recover the applications.

Note: In this case, application could refer to pictures of the Christmas party, user Bob accessing his home drive, a web server, your undocumented Quake server, a mail/DB server, etc.

Hope this helps!