In article <ab471eac-03fc-4865-bc92-c288de30f1e5@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> Gregory Weston <u...@splook.com> wrote: > > > I'd start by cautioning that "cheap" is not a > > great criterion when evaluating backup strategies. > > Pretty much any real backup strategy that a home > > user would even consider is inexpensive in comparison > > to paying someone to retrieve your data from a > > crashed drive or recreating it completely ... > > A good point (although he was also looking for 'easy').
True, but "easy" is a fluffy word. I don't know that I'd consider any realistic backup solution today to be objective "difficult" and nothing should be particularly complex once you've done the initial setup.
> > If you want to get serious about it, the first > > thing is to look into multiple backups, not all > > of which are kept in your house. Rotate through > > them so you've got a couple of generations and > > while your house may burn down you've got a copy > > locked in your desk at work (for example).... > > The general rule of thumb is to rotate through at least 3 copies (and > make sure that they're actually savign data).
That right there is an *excellent* point that I'm ashamed to have omitted. Any worthwhile backup strategy involves actually *testing* the backup (generally by a restore). Before you need it.
G
-- "Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ... burning?" - Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix
