Recommend an automatic backup program for LAN users to a server?

[Stattlich]

I have a peer-to-peer network of twelve clients that need their data (very minimal in capacity- importance is great) backed up to a NAS/general data server that I just deployed for this organization. What software title would you recommend for such an environment? And how does something like this work- a client program installed on every machine that automates on a schedule, then talks to the 'mothership' program installed on the server where the data funnels to? What's the price range on a setup like what I'm looking for?

Thanks in advance- haven't looked into this kind of software for a LAN before.

 

[nsafreak]

You could just use the backup software that comes with Windows XP. It's capable of scheduled backups to a network drive.

 

[skace]

Why don't they just work directly off the NAS? IE, if it's a word document, save it to the NAS, or if it's an application, set the data directory to a folder on the NAS. And then setup a tape storage device that backs up the NAS. It seems that would make more sense than simply backing local data to the NAS as a means of retaining supposedly extremely important data.

Just posing that as a question since it sounds like NSA already answered your innitial request. I've never had to setup anything of this sort since any data environment I've ever dealt with had the important data originate on the server.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: skace
Why don't they just work directly off the NAS? IE, if it's a word document, save it to the NAS, or if it's an application, set the data directory to a folder on the NAS. And then setup a tape storage device that backs up the NAS. It seems that would make more sense than simply backing local data to the NAS as a means of retaining supposedly extremely important data.

Just posing that as a question since it sounds like NSA already answered your innitial request. I've never had to setup anything of this sort since any data environment I've ever dealt with had the important data originate on the server.

He says the data size is low, so he could probably even get away with regular backups to CD or DVD instead of spending a lot on a tape solution.

But I agree. Keep all of the data on the NAS. You don't want to accidentally have two of the same file floating around because it's stored locally.

 

[Stattlich]

I had forgotten about the built-in software within Windows XP that does this... where is that located?

Originally posted by: skace
Why don't they just work directly off the NAS? IE, if it's a word document, save it to the NAS, or if it's an application, set the data directory to a folder on the NAS. And then setup a tape storage device that backs up the NAS. It seems that would make more sense than simply backing local data to the NAS as a means of retaining supposedly extremely important data.

It's a great idea, and something I practice myself personally for my setup at home. But these folks are looking for more of a redundant and safe solution rather than something more efficient and single-channeled. Much as I have faith in the server I built them, if we went that route and something cratered (even though I've got a RAID1 running in there), all of their data would be gone and they'd be left with nothing but Internet terminals sitting around the building.

 

[Stattlich]

You don't want to accidentally have two of the same file floating around because it's stored locally.

That's why whatever solution I decide on needs to have the capability to only backup files modified within the last 'X' amount of time since the last backup, or the capability to (caveman approach) just overwrite everything every time. The source data from the client computers are what is held as the primary data when dealing with two versions.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: Stattlich

You don't want to accidentally have two of the same file floating around because it's stored locally.

That's why whatever solution I decide on needs to have the capability to only backup files modified within the last 'X' amount of time since the last backup, or the capability to (caveman approach) just overwrite everything every time. The source data from the client computers are what is held as the primary data when dealing with two versions.

Just put your data in one source (on the NAS), and you don't have to worry about that.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Stattlich
I had forgotten about the built-in software within Windows XP that does this... where is that located?

Originally posted by: skace
Why don't they just work directly off the NAS? IE, if it's a word document, save it to the NAS, or if it's an application, set the data directory to a folder on the NAS. And then setup a tape storage device that backs up the NAS. It seems that would make more sense than simply backing local data to the NAS as a means of retaining supposedly extremely important data.

It's a great idea, and something I practice myself personally for my setup at home. But these folks are looking for more of a redundant and safe solution rather than something more efficient and single-channeled. Much as I have faith in the server I built them, if we went that route and something cratered (even though I've got a RAID1 running in there), all of their data would be gone and they'd be left with nothing but Internet terminals sitting around the building.

. Unless are you referring to how long it would take to recover from an outage to your NAS.

 

[Stattlich]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: Stattlich

You don't want to accidentally have two of the same file floating around because it's stored locally.

That's why whatever solution I decide on needs to have the capability to only backup files modified within the last 'X' amount of time since the last backup, or the capability to (caveman approach) just overwrite everything every time. The source data from the client computers are what is held as the primary data when dealing with two versions.

Just put your data in one source (on the NAS), and you don't have to worry about that.

Originally posted by: Stattlich...these folks are looking for more of a redundant and safe solution rather than something more efficient and single-channeled. Much as I have faith in the server I built them, if we went that route and something cratered (even though I've got a RAID1 running in there), all of their data would be gone and they'd be left with nothing but Internet terminals sitting around the building.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: Stattlich

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: Stattlich

You don't want to accidentally have two of the same file floating around because it's stored locally.

That's why whatever solution I decide on needs to have the capability to only backup files modified within the last 'X' amount of time since the last backup, or the capability to (caveman approach) just overwrite everything every time. The source data from the client computers are what is held as the primary data when dealing with two versions.

Just put your data in one source (on the NAS), and you don't have to worry about that.

Originally posted by: Stattlich...these folks are looking for more of a redundant and safe solution rather than something more efficient and single-channeled. Much as I have faith in the server I built them, if we went that route and something cratered (even though I've got a RAID1 running in there), all of their data would be gone and they'd be left with nothing but Internet terminals sitting around the building.

I'm sorry, but if you want redundant and safe, backing up to a NAS is not what you want to be doing.

 

[gsellis]

As a possible half solution, you can redirect My Documents to a server share. That allows the My Docs folder to be on the NAS and you would backup the NAS. With laptops, then allow the My Docs to be offline with sync on logon and logoff.

 

[nweaver]

everyone say it with me....


nas is not a backup
nas is not a backup
raid1 is not a backup
raid1 is not a backup



Please read up on DRP's and backups, figure out what you SHOULD be doing, as this isn't it.

 

[Stattlich]

Originally posted by: nweaver
everyone say it with me....


nas is not a backup
nas is not a backup
raid1 is not a backup
raid1 is not a backup



Please read up on DRP's and backups, figure out what you SHOULD be doing, as this isn't it.

How's that? What is it then? Perhaps I could use some enlightenment.

 

[Stattlich]

Originally posted by: nsafreak
You could just use the backup software that comes with Windows XP. It's capable of scheduled backups to a network drive.

I'd like to hear more about this option if you have a moment, 'freak.

 

[Mutilator]

Originally posted by: Stattlich

Originally posted by: nsafreak
You could just use the backup software that comes with Windows XP. It's capable of scheduled backups to a network drive.

I'd like to hear more about this option if you have a moment, 'freak.

Map a drive letter on the client PCs. Ex: Z: = \\NAS\username

Schedule Windows Backup (Start -> All Programs -> Accessories -> System Tools -> Backup to backup their documents or entire C drive if desired to the Z: drive as a file (backup.bkf) and set the program to overwrite the previous file if desired instead of appending it which it'll do by default.

As for backing up yes backing up the clients to the NAS is step 1, but you have to backup the NAS to something too that won't be on all the time. RAID1 is a good idea, but not really considered a backup method, just a fault tolerance.
Example: You could backup to an external USB or Firewire HD that was large enough to hold all the client backup files, but make sure you have more than 1 so they can be rotated on a regular basis and make sure one is stored off-site such as in a bank safe deposit box in case of natural disasters (fire, flood, tornado, etc). The other alternatives would be a tape drive (do people still use those?) and a fire proof cabinet to put the tapes in. Or you could do something like backup NAS1 to NAS2 every Friday, but leave NAS2 powered off during the week but turn it on for the backup to run. Basically you don't want your backup unit to be powered on the same amount of time as your primary unit because of the MTBF would be the same ie both units could fail at the same time then you're really screwed.

 

[Stattlich]

Awesome post- thanks for the assistance and clarification. I could have been better on the latter, myself... forgot to mention that they will be backing up the NAS to DVD or an external Seagate hdd every fiscal quarter. I will be pushing for monthly, but we'll see if they actually do.

The fault tolerance makes sense, and I've had that mindset all along when planning this setup for them, but forgot to mention that the NAS gets backed up too. The DVDs and external hard drive are kept off-site. FWIW, this is a church and the files consist of donation spreadsheets, the accounting files thereof, weekly bulletins, artwork, theological documents, photographs, address books, etc. Nothing major- still in a SOHO category.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Stattlich

Originally posted by: nweaver
everyone say it with me....


nas is not a backup
nas is not a backup
raid1 is not a backup
raid1 is not a backup



Please read up on DRP's and backups, figure out what you SHOULD be doing, as this isn't it.

How's that? What is it then? Perhaps I could use some enlightenment.

It is storage, but not a backup. A backup is something that can be removed from the site and stored in alternate locations (and multiple copies). The DRP is Disaster Recover Plan. If the church server room was destroyed, you could restore the data. Since you are backing it up to DVD, you have a backup. If you are making a second copy and storing it at another location, you have a method of recovery.

 

[Homerboy]

The only CORRECT solution for ACTUAL backup and data integrity is to have everyone working off files located on the NAS (RAID5).
In turn, set up a nightly tape backup routine of the NAS, take tape(s) offs-site the next day and rotate accordingly. An alternative to tapes could be an incremental offs-ite bkacup scheme via the internet to a remote location.

THIS is a backup scheme.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Mutilator
The other alternatives would be a tape drive (do people still use those?) and a fire proof cabinet to put the tapes in.

Most premiere backup solutions are still tape based. Check StorageTek / etc. Our NAS devices backup to huge tape robots.

Edit: And no I'm not recommending a huge tape robot for a small business. Most companies also offer single drive solutions. HP offers a nice 1U tape library that holds 6 tapes.

So yes, tapes are out there.

 

[drag]

They are all right. A raid5 NAS is not backup. It's storage.

DVDs will work good up to a certain point. They are cheap and easy to come buy and take up very small amount of space in long-term storage.

But they are difficult to automate. Tapes are easy to automate... that's their principal advantage. The easier the back is to do, the more likely it will get done. The usability factor is VERY important.