Best practices

[Owl]

I've never had to locate and recover any files from snapshots, simply because I don't keep any working files on the RbRX partition.

The most likely issue you will discover is that a software install wasn't what you wanted - I take a snapshot manually before I install anything. If it turns out to be a dog straight away, one quick roll-back and it's gone. If it turns out to have some unwanted consequences days or weeks later, one quick roll-back and it's gone. I still don't see the need to snapshot every hour, unless your intention is to mimic a journaling file system to track changes in your working files.

I lock snapshots to mark a point at which I made some specific change to the system - typically a program install. The automatic snapshots (which are taken whenever I happen to boot up) are not locked and amenable to automatic deletion. They're not vital, but might be handy when trying to locate a point in time at which a problem arose.

[nexstar]

Like Owl, I normally only protect the system and keep the data (docs, photos etc) separate. I then set Rollback to do a daily unlocked snapshot which gets deleted after 10 days. I also schedule a monthly snapshot which is locked and so doesn't get automatically deleted.

Graham

[bgoodman4]

What is clear is that each person will use Rx to suit their needs. I have Rx on my lap-top and have it protecting the entire C: drive. I am concerned not only about my OS but also about my data being corrupted by an error of whatever cause, be it a virus or something I have done myself. In fact I have fairly frequently mounted a snapshot as a virtual drive in order to recover a previous version of a file. To me this is a valuable function, one which I am glad is available to me, but as I said above, each to their own.

[cattysasha17]

Thank you generous posters for sharing your experience. I see rather divergent points of view and this was what I was hoping for. People use various tactics to accomplish pretty much the same goal: securing a system's well being. I'm still unsure about a few things, but I think when those issues present themselves, I'll be able to find any answers here, already discussed.

Thank you once again and I'm sure I'll develop my own regimen based on your kind remarks.

-Sasha

[nexstar]

Don't forget though that RollBack should be just one layer of protection. My data is backed up to an external drive automatically with older versions available and is also stored online via SugarSync, also with versioning. That's aside from regular imaging, of course .

The important thing is to understand that all of this data can just disappear at pretty much the press of a button and to have some strategy to minimise the effects. Unlike a friend of mine who is pretty hopeless at backing up and so I bought him a ClickFree external drive a couple of months ago which is about as simple as it gets for backing up your data. I spoke to him yesterday and he hadn't got around to taking it out of the box! He's got thousands of photos stored solely on his PC's hard drive which I have gone to great lengths to explain are somewhat at risk currently .

Graham

[bgoodman4]

Originally Posted by nexstar

Don't forget though that RollBack should be just one layer of protection. My data is backed up to an external drive automatically with older versions available and is also stored online via SugarSync, also with versioning. That's aside from regular imaging, of course

Exactly correct, Rx is just one layer of protection, its an important and robust layer but it is useless in the event of a drive meltdown or loss of the PC.

[Masterblaster]

Originally Posted by nexstar

Don't forget though that RollBack should be just one layer of protection. My data is backed up to an external drive automatically with older versions available and is also stored online via SugarSync, also with versioning. That's aside from regular imaging, of course .

The important thing is to understand that all of this data can just disappear at pretty much the press of a button and to have some strategy to minimise the effects. Unlike a friend of mine who is pretty hopeless at backing up and so I bought him a ClickFree external drive a couple of months ago which is about as simple as it gets for backing up your data. I spoke to him yesterday and he hadn't got around to taking it out of the box! He's got thousands of photos stored solely on his PC's hard drive which I have gone to great lengths to explain are somewhat at risk currently .

Graham

I thought you couldn't backup a HDD with Rollback RX installed until ver 10.0 is released?

[bgoodman4]

This has been a much written about topic so I will direct you to the following threads (among many others)


"Rollback RX" and "Image For Windows"... perfect together??


You will find the relevant info regarding backing up in the last few pages of the thread linked to below
Rollback Rx 9.1 - New Build (July 18, 2011) - Wilders Security Forums

The threads address different aspects of imaging with Rx installed so it would be a good idea to take a look at them both. In short however IFW has been found to be the only program that can capture all of the data on the drive INCLUDING all snaps and Rxs complete installation. What this means is an image done correctly using IFW will restore a working Rx along with all the snaps that existed at the time the image was created (but you must create the image correctly for this to work - see the first thread linked to above for what correctly means).

The thread on the Wilders forum addresses imaging with programs other than IMF and with the programs that can do this (including Rxs sister program DriveCloner), as you will see from the thread, you will get a restored image that includes only the state of the drive at the time the image was created (no snaps) and an Rx that must be uninstalled and then reinstalled.

I hope these links ans your questions on this topic.

[nexstar]

....and if you don't mind investing in some additional hardware then this is my favourite method of backing up an entire RB installation .

Graham