![]() ![]() Then, for non-system drives (i.e., project files, etc.), just use TM since i wouldn’t need a bootable copy? For media drives, a RAID is probably best? When a project is all done, how many of you guys dump all the media (captured from tapes, discs, cards, etc. (Now that i type all this out, it sounds like a no-brainer…just seeing if i’m catching all you’re saying and doing enough, while not being too redundant too redundant too redundant). Then, when the terrorists strike and kill just my main system drive, use the CCC backup and it’s latest incremental, then also use the latest TM incremental to end up where i had started within 1 hour of the crashed system drive. ALSO, do a Time Machine backup (to the same backup drive?) but this would mainly be for the regular incrementals that TM does on its own every hour, so there would be a VERY current incremental backup to go back to for any other reason. Then do regular incremental backups via CCC to keep the clone somewhat “current”. So, to be clear, am i on track here? For a system drive, the way to go would be to start with a CCC onto another drive. There are no “technical solutions” to your “artistic problems”.ĭon’t let technology get in the way of your creativity! I hope that better explains why it is so nice to do both. Time Machine does give you multiple points in time that you can go to but it is NOT bootable like CCC. You cannot do that with CCC, it only gives you a backup of one fixed point in time. ![]() So the reason I recommend doing both is because with CCC you get a bootable clone AND with Time Machine you can go back and recover files that may be from several incremental backups ago. The end result from a CCC incremental back up is still an exact clone of the drive, just as if you had done a full clone, it is just a TON faster. When it does that it does NOT keep any older files or files that are no longer on the drive you are backing up from. ![]() When CCC does its incremental backup it simply compares the last CCC backup with the current state of the drive being backed up and then backs up any files that are new or have been changed. I also use Carbon Copy Cloner to do live backups to FW drives, or a second internal, so if a machine goes down, all I have to do is reboot to the other drive and away I go. Time Machine keeps all incremental backups (until the backup drive is full then it drops the oldest one) that way you can go back in time and bring back files that are farther back then the last incremental backup. The incremental backup feature in CCC works fine (its way faster then doing a whole new clone each time), however the incremental feature on CCC works VARY different then they way Time Machine does Incremental backups. “is CCC any good at incremental changes?” ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |