Hi all,

I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How do I
estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard disk)?

Thanks for any advice.

Pat

Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Bill

Bill
Sun Sep 12 14:35:13 CDT 2004

Hi Pat

I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?

At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting to backup
all of it ?

You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this will fill
up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for the OS,
Exchange and then Data.)

Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual mailboxes so
as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard drive than
currrent.

What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5, backup to
tape ?

Hope it gives you some ideas.

Bill


"Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How do I
> estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard disk)?
>
> Thanks for any advice.
>
> Pat
>
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Pat

Pat
Sun Sep 12 19:47:02 CDT 2004

Hi Bill,

Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard disk in one of
our workstations and back up the server to it over the network. This is
for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really isn't a
whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB ide drives
in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions (10GB "C:"
for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for data).
Currently only 35GB is being used in total.

The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the system in case
of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be sufficient
for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a new
controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case there was
other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What do you
think?

Thanks again for the help.

Pat




"Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi Pat
>
> I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
>
> At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting to backup
> all of it ?
>
> You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this will
fill
> up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for the OS,
> Exchange and then Data.)
>
> Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual mailboxes so
> as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard drive than
> currrent.
>
> What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5, backup to
> tape ?
>
> Hope it gives you some ideas.
>
> Bill
>
>
> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How do I
> > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard disk)?
> >
> > Thanks for any advice.
> >
> > Pat
> >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Henry

Henry
Sun Sep 12 23:15:56 CDT 2004

How does:
" Building burnt down and no offsite backup "
rate on the "Catastrophic Failure" Scale ?

...Or
"vandals broke in and Stole/Trashed the computers" ?

--
Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
Melbourne Australia

"Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
news:uLL$wsSmEHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi Bill,
>
> Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard disk in
one of
> our workstations and back up the server to it over the network. This
is
> for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really isn't
a
> whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB ide
drives
> in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions (10GB
"C:"
> for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for
data).
> Currently only 35GB is being used in total.
>
> The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the system
in case
> of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be
sufficient
> for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a new
> controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case there
was
> other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What do
you
> think?
>
> Thanks again for the help.
>
> Pat
>
>
>
>
> "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > Hi Pat
> >
> > I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
> >
> > At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting to
backup
> > all of it ?
> >
> > You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this
will
> fill
> > up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for
the OS,
> > Exchange and then Data.)
> >
> > Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual
mailboxes so
> > as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard drive
than
> > currrent.
> >
> > What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5,
backup to
> > tape ?
> >
> > Hope it gives you some ideas.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How do
I
> > > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard
disk)?
> > >
> > > Thanks for any advice.
> > >
> > > Pat
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by SuperGumby

SuperGumby
Mon Sep 13 07:23:07 CDT 2004

c'mon Henry, we're planning for catastrophic failure but we don't actually
expect anything THAT CATASTROPHIC to hit us.

:-)

"Henry Craven" <IUnknown@Dot.Nyet> wrote in message
news:OJPfihUmEHA.2588@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> How does:
> " Building burnt down and no offsite backup "
> rate on the "Catastrophic Failure" Scale ?
>
> ...Or
> "vandals broke in and Stole/Trashed the computers" ?
>
> --
> Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
> Melbourne Australia
>
> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> news:uLL$wsSmEHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard disk in
> one of
>> our workstations and back up the server to it over the network. This
> is
>> for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really isn't
> a
>> whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB ide
> drives
>> in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions (10GB
> "C:"
>> for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for
> data).
>> Currently only 35GB is being used in total.
>>
>> The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the system
> in case
>> of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be
> sufficient
>> for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a new
>> controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case there
> was
>> other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What do
> you
>> think?
>>
>> Thanks again for the help.
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi Pat
>> >
>> > I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
>> >
>> > At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting to
> backup
>> > all of it ?
>> >
>> > You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this
> will
>> fill
>> > up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for
> the OS,
>> > Exchange and then Data.)
>> >
>> > Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual
> mailboxes so
>> > as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard drive
> than
>> > currrent.
>> >
>> > What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5,
> backup to
>> > tape ?
>> >
>> > Hope it gives you some ideas.
>> >
>> > Bill
>> >
>> >
>> > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
>> > news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How do
> I
>> > > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard
> disk)?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for any advice.
>> > >
>> > > Pat
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Pat

Pat
Mon Sep 13 08:21:31 CDT 2004

Ya, it's always a judgement call as to which contingencies to plan for.

In my location I think the most likely catastropies are a lightening strike,
RAID card failure, or possibly some virsus (or hacker) infiltration,
although I have systems in place to minimize the chances of these ( UPS with
surge suppression, A/V software, ISA). I'm willing to put myself at the
mercy of God for the rest (and try to live a good life!, :^).

Thanks, -Pat


"Henry Craven" <IUnknown@Dot.Nyet> wrote in message
news:OJPfihUmEHA.2588@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> How does:
> " Building burnt down and no offsite backup "
> rate on the "Catastrophic Failure" Scale ?
>
> ...Or
> "vandals broke in and Stole/Trashed the computers" ?
>
> --
> Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
> Melbourne Australia
>
> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> news:uLL$wsSmEHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > Hi Bill,
> >
> > Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard disk in
> one of
> > our workstations and back up the server to it over the network. This
> is
> > for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really isn't
> a
> > whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB ide
> drives
> > in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions (10GB
> "C:"
> > for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for
> data).
> > Currently only 35GB is being used in total.
> >
> > The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the system
> in case
> > of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be
> sufficient
> > for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a new
> > controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case there
> was
> > other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What do
> you
> > think?
> >
> > Thanks again for the help.
> >
> > Pat
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > Hi Pat
> > >
> > > I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
> > >
> > > At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting to
> backup
> > > all of it ?
> > >
> > > You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this
> will
> > fill
> > > up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for
> the OS,
> > > Exchange and then Data.)
> > >
> > > Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual
> mailboxes so
> > > as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard drive
> than
> > > currrent.
> > >
> > > What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5,
> backup to
> > > tape ?
> > >
> > > Hope it gives you some ideas.
> > >
> > > Bill
> > >
> > >
> > > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > > news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How do
> I
> > > > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard
> disk)?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for any advice.
> > > >
> > > > Pat
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Bill

Bill
Fri Sep 17 14:26:33 CDT 2004

Hi Pat sorry not replying sooner as been away.

Firstly though, apologies for Henry and SG prior comments. Henry states a
good question and SG talking to him he forgot to offer any suggestions,
Henry was probably waiting for your response...LOL

Anyhow, backing upto another hard drive poses many questions.

Using backup software to disk will create a large backup file so needs the
new server reinstalled to have the backup software to access the data. What
you have mentioned so far another 120 gb would be fine.

To have a quicker recovery option you would want to consider ' replication '
software. This option would hopefully make a complete duplicate of your
original hard drive. To use this hard drive though would require an almost
if not identical server hardware wise. Same motherboard, raid card, video
card, nics etc. Some items you could get away with , nics and video cards
but some tweaking maybe required when the server came backup, definately
with the nics. This new server must also have any cards in the correct slots
as the original. This option hopefully is just a matter of removing hard
drive from pc and putting in server that was standing idle somewhere.

Either option will put a load on the network and time taken over a network
is very long. With regards to the replication software, searching google
there are many DATA replication programs and you must ensure it caters for
operating system and exchange. In addition it can't be done in ' parallel '
environment i.e server running live on the network because you cannot have 2
small business servers running together on the same network.

Backing up a ' full ' sbs system has its problems. Just search this NG in
google for LFN and SFN...long and short file names. There has been much
discussion on this topic. Me personally I have found it quicker to backup
just exchange and data. Compared to restoring a full server and just
exchange and data the latter was always quicker and less problems. Be aware
though there are certain steps restoring from your backup, domain and
exchange names must be the same on a new installation.

Sorry if this has given you a headache and prompted more questions, don't
hesitate to ask.

Bill

www.smallbizserver.net (2000 and 2003)

microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000 (2000 NG)

microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs (2003 NG)

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs

http://www.sbslinks.com/




"Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
news:epVFhSZmEHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Ya, it's always a judgement call as to which contingencies to plan for.
>
> In my location I think the most likely catastropies are a lightening
> strike,
> RAID card failure, or possibly some virsus (or hacker) infiltration,
> although I have systems in place to minimize the chances of these ( UPS
> with
> surge suppression, A/V software, ISA). I'm willing to put myself at the
> mercy of God for the rest (and try to live a good life!, :^).
>
> Thanks, -Pat
>
>
> "Henry Craven" <IUnknown@Dot.Nyet> wrote in message
> news:OJPfihUmEHA.2588@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> How does:
>> " Building burnt down and no offsite backup "
>> rate on the "Catastrophic Failure" Scale ?
>>
>> ...Or
>> "vandals broke in and Stole/Trashed the computers" ?
>>
>> --
>> Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
>> Melbourne Australia
>>
>> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
>> news:uLL$wsSmEHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi Bill,
>> >
>> > Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard disk in
>> one of
>> > our workstations and back up the server to it over the network. This
>> is
>> > for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really isn't
>> a
>> > whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB ide
>> drives
>> > in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions (10GB
>> "C:"
>> > for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for
>> data).
>> > Currently only 35GB is being used in total.
>> >
>> > The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the system
>> in case
>> > of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be
>> sufficient
>> > for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a new
>> > controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case there
>> was
>> > other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What do
>> you
>> > think?
>> >
>> > Thanks again for the help.
>> >
>> > Pat
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
>> > news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> > > Hi Pat
>> > >
>> > > I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
>> > >
>> > > At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting to
>> backup
>> > > all of it ?
>> > >
>> > > You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this
>> will
>> > fill
>> > > up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for
>> the OS,
>> > > Exchange and then Data.)
>> > >
>> > > Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual
>> mailboxes so
>> > > as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard drive
>> than
>> > > currrent.
>> > >
>> > > What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5,
>> backup to
>> > > tape ?
>> > >
>> > > Hope it gives you some ideas.
>> > >
>> > > Bill
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> > > > Hi all,
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How do
>> I
>> > > > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard
>> disk)?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for any advice.
>> > > >
>> > > > Pat
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Pat

Pat
Tue Sep 28 08:11:52 CDT 2004

Thanks Bill for the extensive feedback.

What I had in mind was just using the backup utilities that come with SBS to
mainly back up Exchange and Data. I plan to upgrade to SBS03 soon, and I
believe SBS03 has resolved much of the LFN vs SFN issues and improved the
ease of restorations. (At least, I thought I read that somewhere).

Our main need is a means to recover critical data in case of catastropic
failure (i.e. both the RAID1 drives to become corrupted or damaged for some
reason). If it takes a day to restore, that would not be the end of the
world in our case. So I was really just looking for the simplest and lowest
maintenance approach. Also, if space permits, I was thinking keeping
several backups from successives days in case someone needs to recover a
deleted file or email, or one of the backups gets corrupted.

Thanks again for the help, and any other advice/suggestions are very much
welcomed.

Pat

(Sorry for the delay in responding and hope you see this).




"Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ePL3AxOnEHA.3396@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi Pat sorry not replying sooner as been away.
>
> Firstly though, apologies for Henry and SG prior comments. Henry states a
> good question and SG talking to him he forgot to offer any suggestions,
> Henry was probably waiting for your response...LOL
>
> Anyhow, backing upto another hard drive poses many questions.
>
> Using backup software to disk will create a large backup file so needs the
> new server reinstalled to have the backup software to access the data.
What
> you have mentioned so far another 120 gb would be fine.
>
> To have a quicker recovery option you would want to consider ' replication
'
> software. This option would hopefully make a complete duplicate of your
> original hard drive. To use this hard drive though would require an almost
> if not identical server hardware wise. Same motherboard, raid card, video
> card, nics etc. Some items you could get away with , nics and video cards
> but some tweaking maybe required when the server came backup, definately
> with the nics. This new server must also have any cards in the correct
slots
> as the original. This option hopefully is just a matter of removing hard
> drive from pc and putting in server that was standing idle somewhere.
>
> Either option will put a load on the network and time taken over a network
> is very long. With regards to the replication software, searching google
> there are many DATA replication programs and you must ensure it caters for
> operating system and exchange. In addition it can't be done in ' parallel
'
> environment i.e server running live on the network because you cannot have
2
> small business servers running together on the same network.
>
> Backing up a ' full ' sbs system has its problems. Just search this NG in
> google for LFN and SFN...long and short file names. There has been much
> discussion on this topic. Me personally I have found it quicker to backup
> just exchange and data. Compared to restoring a full server and just
> exchange and data the latter was always quicker and less problems. Be
aware
> though there are certain steps restoring from your backup, domain and
> exchange names must be the same on a new installation.
>
> Sorry if this has given you a headache and prompted more questions, don't
> hesitate to ask.
>
> Bill
>
> www.smallbizserver.net (2000 and 2003)
>
> microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000 (2000 NG)
>
> microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs (2003 NG)
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs
>
> http://www.sbslinks.com/
>
>
>
>
> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> news:epVFhSZmEHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > Ya, it's always a judgement call as to which contingencies to plan for.
> >
> > In my location I think the most likely catastropies are a lightening
> > strike,
> > RAID card failure, or possibly some virsus (or hacker) infiltration,
> > although I have systems in place to minimize the chances of these ( UPS
> > with
> > surge suppression, A/V software, ISA). I'm willing to put myself at the
> > mercy of God for the rest (and try to live a good life!, :^).
> >
> > Thanks, -Pat
> >
> >
> > "Henry Craven" <IUnknown@Dot.Nyet> wrote in message
> > news:OJPfihUmEHA.2588@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> How does:
> >> " Building burnt down and no offsite backup "
> >> rate on the "Catastrophic Failure" Scale ?
> >>
> >> ...Or
> >> "vandals broke in and Stole/Trashed the computers" ?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
> >> Melbourne Australia
> >>
> >> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> >> news:uLL$wsSmEHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >> > Hi Bill,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard disk in
> >> one of
> >> > our workstations and back up the server to it over the network.
This
> >> is
> >> > for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really
isn't
> >> a
> >> > whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB ide
> >> drives
> >> > in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions (10GB
> >> "C:"
> >> > for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for
> >> data).
> >> > Currently only 35GB is being used in total.
> >> >
> >> > The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the system
> >> in case
> >> > of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be
> >> sufficient
> >> > for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a new
> >> > controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case
there
> >> was
> >> > other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What do
> >> you
> >> > think?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks again for the help.
> >> >
> >> > Pat
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> > news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> >> > > Hi Pat
> >> > >
> >> > > I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
> >> > >
> >> > > At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting to
> >> backup
> >> > > all of it ?
> >> > >
> >> > > You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this
> >> will
> >> > fill
> >> > > up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for
> >> the OS,
> >> > > Exchange and then Data.)
> >> > >
> >> > > Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual
> >> mailboxes so
> >> > > as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard drive
> >> than
> >> > > currrent.
> >> > >
> >> > > What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5,
> >> backup to
> >> > > tape ?
> >> > >
> >> > > Hope it gives you some ideas.
> >> > >
> >> > > Bill
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> >> > > news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> >> > > > Hi all,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How
do
> >> I
> >> > > > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a hard
> >> disk)?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks for any advice.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Pat
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Kevin

Kevin
Tue Sep 28 12:56:08 CDT 2004

As far as backups to recover a particular file, keep in mind that SBS2003
implements Volume Shadow Copu Services which essentially does this for you
real time. If someone accidentally deletes a file from the server drive, you
can go thru VSS and restore a previous copy of that file - without using any
tape or disk backup!

--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"



"Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
news:uVEt6yVpEHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Bill for the extensive feedback.
>
> What I had in mind was just using the backup utilities that come with SBS
to
> mainly back up Exchange and Data. I plan to upgrade to SBS03 soon, and I
> believe SBS03 has resolved much of the LFN vs SFN issues and improved the
> ease of restorations. (At least, I thought I read that somewhere).
>
> Our main need is a means to recover critical data in case of catastropic
> failure (i.e. both the RAID1 drives to become corrupted or damaged for
some
> reason). If it takes a day to restore, that would not be the end of the
> world in our case. So I was really just looking for the simplest and
lowest
> maintenance approach. Also, if space permits, I was thinking keeping
> several backups from successives days in case someone needs to recover a
> deleted file or email, or one of the backups gets corrupted.
>
> Thanks again for the help, and any other advice/suggestions are very much
> welcomed.
>
> Pat
>
> (Sorry for the delay in responding and hope you see this).
>
>
>
>
> "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ePL3AxOnEHA.3396@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Hi Pat sorry not replying sooner as been away.
> >
> > Firstly though, apologies for Henry and SG prior comments. Henry states
a
> > good question and SG talking to him he forgot to offer any suggestions,
> > Henry was probably waiting for your response...LOL
> >
> > Anyhow, backing upto another hard drive poses many questions.
> >
> > Using backup software to disk will create a large backup file so needs
the
> > new server reinstalled to have the backup software to access the data.
> What
> > you have mentioned so far another 120 gb would be fine.
> >
> > To have a quicker recovery option you would want to consider '
replication
> '
> > software. This option would hopefully make a complete duplicate of your
> > original hard drive. To use this hard drive though would require an
almost
> > if not identical server hardware wise. Same motherboard, raid card,
video
> > card, nics etc. Some items you could get away with , nics and video
cards
> > but some tweaking maybe required when the server came backup, definately
> > with the nics. This new server must also have any cards in the correct
> slots
> > as the original. This option hopefully is just a matter of removing hard
> > drive from pc and putting in server that was standing idle somewhere.
> >
> > Either option will put a load on the network and time taken over a
network
> > is very long. With regards to the replication software, searching google
> > there are many DATA replication programs and you must ensure it caters
for
> > operating system and exchange. In addition it can't be done in '
parallel
> '
> > environment i.e server running live on the network because you cannot
have
> 2
> > small business servers running together on the same network.
> >
> > Backing up a ' full ' sbs system has its problems. Just search this NG
in
> > google for LFN and SFN...long and short file names. There has been much
> > discussion on this topic. Me personally I have found it quicker to
backup
> > just exchange and data. Compared to restoring a full server and just
> > exchange and data the latter was always quicker and less problems. Be
> aware
> > though there are certain steps restoring from your backup, domain and
> > exchange names must be the same on a new installation.
> >
> > Sorry if this has given you a headache and prompted more questions,
don't
> > hesitate to ask.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > www.smallbizserver.net (2000 and 2003)
> >
> > microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000 (2000 NG)
> >
> > microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs (2003 NG)
> >
> >
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000
> >
> >
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs
> >
> > http://www.sbslinks.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > news:epVFhSZmEHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > Ya, it's always a judgement call as to which contingencies to plan
for.
> > >
> > > In my location I think the most likely catastropies are a lightening
> > > strike,
> > > RAID card failure, or possibly some virsus (or hacker) infiltration,
> > > although I have systems in place to minimize the chances of these (
UPS
> > > with
> > > surge suppression, A/V software, ISA). I'm willing to put myself at
the
> > > mercy of God for the rest (and try to live a good life!, :^).
> > >
> > > Thanks, -Pat
> > >
> > >
> > > "Henry Craven" <IUnknown@Dot.Nyet> wrote in message
> > > news:OJPfihUmEHA.2588@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > >> How does:
> > >> " Building burnt down and no offsite backup "
> > >> rate on the "Catastrophic Failure" Scale ?
> > >>
> > >> ...Or
> > >> "vandals broke in and Stole/Trashed the computers" ?
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
> > >> Melbourne Australia
> > >>
> > >> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:uLL$wsSmEHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > >> > Hi Bill,
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard disk
in
> > >> one of
> > >> > our workstations and back up the server to it over the network.
> This
> > >> is
> > >> > for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really
> isn't
> > >> a
> > >> > whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB ide
> > >> drives
> > >> > in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions
(10GB
> > >> "C:"
> > >> > for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for
> > >> data).
> > >> > Currently only 35GB is being used in total.
> > >> >
> > >> > The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the
system
> > >> in case
> > >> > of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be
> > >> sufficient
> > >> > for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a
new
> > >> > controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case
> there
> > >> was
> > >> > other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What do
> > >> you
> > >> > think?
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks again for the help.
> > >> >
> > >> > Pat
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >> > news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > >> > > Hi Pat
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting
to
> > >> backup
> > >> > > all of it ?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise this
> > >> will
> > >> > fill
> > >> > > up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive for
> > >> the OS,
> > >> > > Exchange and then Data.)
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual
> > >> mailboxes so
> > >> > > as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard
drive
> > >> than
> > >> > > currrent.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5,
> > >> backup to
> > >> > > tape ?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Hope it gives you some ideas.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Bill
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > >> > > news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > >> > > > Hi all,
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk. How
> do
> > >> I
> > >> > > > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a
hard
> > >> disk)?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Thanks for any advice.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Pat
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Pat

Pat
Tue Sep 28 23:15:21 CDT 2004

Wow. That's impressive. Does that include deleted email as well?

Thanks for the info Kevin. I appreciate it.

Pat


"Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbacMVP@gte.net> wrote in message
news:%23ULAwRYpEHA.1160@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> As far as backups to recover a particular file, keep in mind that SBS2003
> implements Volume Shadow Copu Services which essentially does this for you
> real time. If someone accidentally deletes a file from the server drive,
you
> can go thru VSS and restore a previous copy of that file - without using
any
> tape or disk backup!
>
> --
> Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
> "The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"
>
>
>
> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> news:uVEt6yVpEHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > Thanks Bill for the extensive feedback.
> >
> > What I had in mind was just using the backup utilities that come with
SBS
> to
> > mainly back up Exchange and Data. I plan to upgrade to SBS03 soon, and
I
> > believe SBS03 has resolved much of the LFN vs SFN issues and improved
the
> > ease of restorations. (At least, I thought I read that somewhere).
> >
> > Our main need is a means to recover critical data in case of catastropic
> > failure (i.e. both the RAID1 drives to become corrupted or damaged for
> some
> > reason). If it takes a day to restore, that would not be the end of the
> > world in our case. So I was really just looking for the simplest and
> lowest
> > maintenance approach. Also, if space permits, I was thinking keeping
> > several backups from successives days in case someone needs to recover a
> > deleted file or email, or one of the backups gets corrupted.
> >
> > Thanks again for the help, and any other advice/suggestions are very
much
> > welcomed.
> >
> > Pat
> >
> > (Sorry for the delay in responding and hope you see this).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:ePL3AxOnEHA.3396@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > Hi Pat sorry not replying sooner as been away.
> > >
> > > Firstly though, apologies for Henry and SG prior comments. Henry
states
> a
> > > good question and SG talking to him he forgot to offer any
suggestions,
> > > Henry was probably waiting for your response...LOL
> > >
> > > Anyhow, backing upto another hard drive poses many questions.
> > >
> > > Using backup software to disk will create a large backup file so needs
> the
> > > new server reinstalled to have the backup software to access the data.
> > What
> > > you have mentioned so far another 120 gb would be fine.
> > >
> > > To have a quicker recovery option you would want to consider '
> replication
> > '
> > > software. This option would hopefully make a complete duplicate of
your
> > > original hard drive. To use this hard drive though would require an
> almost
> > > if not identical server hardware wise. Same motherboard, raid card,
> video
> > > card, nics etc. Some items you could get away with , nics and video
> cards
> > > but some tweaking maybe required when the server came backup,
definately
> > > with the nics. This new server must also have any cards in the correct
> > slots
> > > as the original. This option hopefully is just a matter of removing
hard
> > > drive from pc and putting in server that was standing idle somewhere.
> > >
> > > Either option will put a load on the network and time taken over a
> network
> > > is very long. With regards to the replication software, searching
google
> > > there are many DATA replication programs and you must ensure it caters
> for
> > > operating system and exchange. In addition it can't be done in '
> parallel
> > '
> > > environment i.e server running live on the network because you cannot
> have
> > 2
> > > small business servers running together on the same network.
> > >
> > > Backing up a ' full ' sbs system has its problems. Just search this NG
> in
> > > google for LFN and SFN...long and short file names. There has been
much
> > > discussion on this topic. Me personally I have found it quicker to
> backup
> > > just exchange and data. Compared to restoring a full server and just
> > > exchange and data the latter was always quicker and less problems. Be
> > aware
> > > though there are certain steps restoring from your backup, domain and
> > > exchange names must be the same on a new installation.
> > >
> > > Sorry if this has given you a headache and prompted more questions,
> don't
> > > hesitate to ask.
> > >
> > > Bill
> > >
> > > www.smallbizserver.net (2000 and 2003)
> > >
> > > microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000 (2000 NG)
> > >
> > > microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs (2003 NG)
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&group=microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs
> > >
> > > http://www.sbslinks.com/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > > news:epVFhSZmEHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > Ya, it's always a judgement call as to which contingencies to plan
> for.
> > > >
> > > > In my location I think the most likely catastropies are a lightening
> > > > strike,
> > > > RAID card failure, or possibly some virsus (or hacker) infiltration,
> > > > although I have systems in place to minimize the chances of these (
> UPS
> > > > with
> > > > surge suppression, A/V software, ISA). I'm willing to put myself at
> the
> > > > mercy of God for the rest (and try to live a good life!, :^).
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, -Pat
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Henry Craven" <IUnknown@Dot.Nyet> wrote in message
> > > > news:OJPfihUmEHA.2588@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > >> How does:
> > > >> " Building burnt down and no offsite backup "
> > > >> rate on the "Catastrophic Failure" Scale ?
> > > >>
> > > >> ...Or
> > > >> "vandals broke in and Stole/Trashed the computers" ?
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
> > > >> Melbourne Australia
> > > >>
> > > >> "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > > >> news:uLL$wsSmEHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > >> > Hi Bill,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks for the response. The plan is to installed a new hard
disk
> in
> > > >> one of
> > > >> > our workstations and back up the server to it over the network.
> > This
> > > >> is
> > > >> > for a very small business though, (4 employess) and there really
> > isn't
> > > >> a
> > > >> > whole lot of data. The current disk setup uses a pair of 120GB
ide
> > > >> drives
> > > >> > in a RAID1 (mirror) arrangement, and there are three partitions
> (10GB
> > > >> "C:"
> > > >> > for the OS, 15GB "D" for the Exhange, and the remaining "S:" for
> > > >> data).
> > > >> > Currently only 35GB is being used in total.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The main intent for the backup is to enable us to restore the
> system
> > > >> in case
> > > >> > of catastrophic failure. A 120GB drive seems like it should be
> > > >> sufficient
> > > >> > for this (it's the largest our workstations will handle without a
> new
> > > >> > controller), but I wanted to run this past the newsgroup in case
> > there
> > > >> was
> > > >> > other aspects to this that would dictate something larger. What
do
> > > >> you
> > > >> > think?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks again for the help.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Pat
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > >> > news:OK8Gi%23PmEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > >> > > Hi Pat
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I would ask why ? Is this a removable hard drive ?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > At a minimum it would need to be the same size. Are you wanting
> to
> > > >> backup
> > > >> > > all of it ?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > You must backup any way to clear the exchange logs otherwise
this
> > > >> will
> > > >> > fill
> > > >> > > up the drive the logs are on. ( I usually split my hard drive
for
> > > >> the OS,
> > > >> > > Exchange and then Data.)
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Also you may want to bak up the exchange store and individual
> > > >> mailboxes so
> > > >> > > as this is being backed up twice you would need a bigger hard
> drive
> > > >> than
> > > >> > > currrent.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > What redundancy do you have at the moment ? Mirroring, Raid 5,
> > > >> backup to
> > > >> > > tape ?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Hope it gives you some ideas.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Bill
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > > >> > > news:Oui1RQPmEHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > >> > > > Hi all,
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I would like to backup my SBS server to a fixed hard disk.
How
> > do
> > > >> I
> > > >> > > > estimate how much capacity I need for this (i.e how large a
> hard
> > > >> disk)?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Thanks for any advice.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Pat
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Backing up to hard disk - how large? by Henry

Henry
Wed Sep 29 00:29:00 CDT 2004

Exchange includes a settable retention period for deleted e'Mail (
default 30 days )
so e'mail can be recovered by the user via Outlook.

It's worthwhile going to the Server sites at microsoft.com and reading
up on the features of the products if your in the industry or dealing
with it.

--
Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}
Melbourne Australia

"Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
news:eqZayrdpEHA.3364@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Wow. That's impressive. Does that include deleted email as well?
>
> Thanks for the info Kevin. I appreciate it.
>
> Pat
>
>
> "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbacMVP@gte.net> wrote in message
> news:%23ULAwRYpEHA.1160@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > As far as backups to recover a particular file, keep in mind that
SBS2003
> > implements Volume Shadow Copu Services which essentially does this
for you
> > real time. If someone accidentally deletes a file from the server
drive,
> you
> > can go thru VSS and restore a previous copy of that file - without
using
> any
> > tape or disk backup!
> >
> > --
> > Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
> > "The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"
> >
> >
> >
> > "Pat" <pat@reemoovethismp-m.com> wrote in message
> > news:uVEt6yVpEHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > Thanks Bill for the extensive feedback.
> > >
> > > What I had in mind was just using the backup utilities that come
with
> SBS
> > to
> > > mainly back up Exchange and Data. I plan to upgrade to SBS03
soon, and
> I
> > > believe SBS03 has resolved much of the LFN vs SFN issues and
improved
> the
> > > ease of restorations. (At least, I thought I read that somewhere).
> > >
> > > Our main need is a means to recover critical data in case of
catastropic
> > > failure (i.e. both the RAID1 drives to become corrupted or damaged
for
> > some
> > > reason). If it takes a day to restore, that would not be the end
of the
> > > world in our case. So I was really just looking for the simplest
and
> > lowest
> > > maintenance approach. Also, if space permits, I was thinking
keeping
> > > several backups from successives days in case someone needs to
recover a
> > > deleted file or email, or one of the backups gets corrupted.
> > >
> > > Thanks again for the help, and any other advice/suggestions are
very
> much
> > > welcomed.
> > >
> > > Pat
> > >
> > > (Sorry for the delay in responding and hope you see this).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Bill Swan" <bill@nospamfirstresponseit.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:ePL3AxOnEHA.3396@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > Hi Pat sorry not replying sooner as been away.
> > > >
> > > > Firstly though, apologies for Henry and SG prior comments. Henry
> states
> > a
> > > > good question and SG talking to him he forgot to offer any
> suggestions,
> > > > Henry was probably waiting for your response...LOL
> > > >
> > > > Anyhow, backing upto another hard drive poses many questions.
> > > >
> > > > Using backup software to disk will create a large backup file so
needs
> > the
> > > > new server reinstalled to have the backup software to access the
data.
> > > What
> > >