How can I backup my hard drive on my website
January 10, 2009 9:05 AM Subscribe
I'd like to start backing up my hard drive on space I have on one of my hosting accounts. Is there a way to do this easily and/or automatically?
We got burgled last month (Christmas day!) and both of our external hard drives, including the one hidden at the back of the closet in a mothball box, were stolen. I would like to back my hard drive up online from now on, partially because hard drives seem to fail regularly (when they don't get stolen), partially because Time Machine is a piece of crap and should never be used for backing up data that you'll actually need, and partially because our insurance will not be reimbursing us for the loss, and between that and the other expensive things stolen, we can't afford to replace the external hard drives.
I've got the space on my hosting account, and mostly just want to back up a few things (I'm on a Mac): iTunes, iPhoto, and my 'My Documents' folder.
Ideally it would be something that could happen weekly- I can remind myself to do it but it would be great if it could be automated. Any suggestions?
Thanks!
We got burgled last month (Christmas day!) and both of our external hard drives, including the one hidden at the back of the closet in a mothball box, were stolen. I would like to back my hard drive up online from now on, partially because hard drives seem to fail regularly (when they don't get stolen), partially because Time Machine is a piece of crap and should never be used for backing up data that you'll actually need, and partially because our insurance will not be reimbursing us for the loss, and between that and the other expensive things stolen, we can't afford to replace the external hard drives.
I've got the space on my hosting account, and mostly just want to back up a few things (I'm on a Mac): iTunes, iPhoto, and my 'My Documents' folder.
Ideally it would be something that could happen weekly- I can remind myself to do it but it would be great if it could be automated. Any suggestions?
Thanks!
Response by poster: Thanks for the link- I did some searching, but didn't come up with that one (oops!)
I access my hosting account via ftp (I use fetch, but just because it is easy).
posted by arnicae at 9:19 AM on January 10, 2009
I access my hosting account via ftp (I use fetch, but just because it is easy).
posted by arnicae at 9:19 AM on January 10, 2009
Response by poster: Oh, and I have a number of websites (so lots of extra space) hosted with Network Solutions. I believe they don't want things just stored there so I'd have to be serving them- but I thought as long as I put them on a page with no links to them and a random URL, I might be fine.
posted by arnicae at 9:24 AM on January 10, 2009
posted by arnicae at 9:24 AM on January 10, 2009
How much data are you talking about? Mozy has wonderful integration with macs, and you can store up to 2GB for free. If you want unlimited storage, the price is $5/mo. You should definitely try out the free service at the very least.
posted by mahoganyslide at 9:59 AM on January 10, 2009
posted by mahoganyslide at 9:59 AM on January 10, 2009
I use (the free edition of) SyncBack to backup to FTP.
I can't see why web hosting wouldn't like you to store things without serving them -- after all, it saves them bandwidth -- but then companies aren't always logical. There are plenty of other cheap online hosting services if you're looking.
posted by katrielalex at 10:01 AM on January 10, 2009
I can't see why web hosting wouldn't like you to store things without serving them -- after all, it saves them bandwidth -- but then companies aren't always logical. There are plenty of other cheap online hosting services if you're looking.
posted by katrielalex at 10:01 AM on January 10, 2009
Sorry, SyncBack is Windows only as far as I can see. I'll read the question all the way through next time, honest!
posted by katrielalex at 10:02 AM on January 10, 2009
posted by katrielalex at 10:02 AM on January 10, 2009
I think you're probably best off just signing up with a backup service (I use Mozy) rather than risking falling foul of hosting terms and conditions. It's a really good idea to also keep a local backup so you should try to get a new external hard drive at some point (you don't have to use Time Machine; I use SuperDuper to create a bootable backup).
posted by malevolent at 10:24 AM on January 10, 2009
posted by malevolent at 10:24 AM on January 10, 2009
I use Mozy. In fact I'm using it right now to restore files (dropped external drive). The drawback is that it is excruciatingly slow for initial backup, and restore. Incremental nightly back-up I find goes unnoticed though.
The thing I like about Mozy, over say FTP backup to one of my websites, is that it's hassle-free encrypted by default, and that webhosts generally don't like you using the space for non-website purposes (even though from your point of view you've paid for the space).
posted by hungrysquirrels at 10:37 AM on January 10, 2009
The thing I like about Mozy, over say FTP backup to one of my websites, is that it's hassle-free encrypted by default, and that webhosts generally don't like you using the space for non-website purposes (even though from your point of view you've paid for the space).
posted by hungrysquirrels at 10:37 AM on January 10, 2009
I have had good success with Time Machine (and Time Capsule). I also back up to Amazon's S3 using Transmit. It's been the easiest to drag and drop things into my S3 account.
Man I can't believe they got into your closet and nabbed the hidden drive. I'll worry a bit more now as that's what I do.
posted by Hands of Manos at 10:56 AM on January 10, 2009
Man I can't believe they got into your closet and nabbed the hidden drive. I'll worry a bit more now as that's what I do.
posted by Hands of Manos at 10:56 AM on January 10, 2009
I wrote a simple bash script to rsync my data to a server every hour ala Time Machine, but with free tools and to any server anywhere. It's totally automated. MeFi Mail me if you want the details.
posted by cdmwebs at 11:02 AM on January 10, 2009
posted by cdmwebs at 11:02 AM on January 10, 2009
What is crappy about Time Machine? You'll want incremental full system backups like Time Machine performs. So you should buy another drive whenever possible.
CrashPlan's site claims Time Machine copies over new files without tracking deltas, which seems only semi-incremental. Is that your complaint?
If not, rsync -aP --link-dest=$previous $source $current will handily create such semi-incremental backups anyplace. If so, rdiff-backup will produce full incremental backups.
You might also consider using some real version control system like git^, especially for work files (see also tutorial and gibak). You can install all this stuff easily via MacPorts.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:05 AM on January 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
CrashPlan's site claims Time Machine copies over new files without tracking deltas, which seems only semi-incremental. Is that your complaint?
If not, rsync -aP --link-dest=$previous $source $current will handily create such semi-incremental backups anyplace. If so, rdiff-backup will produce full incremental backups.
You might also consider using some real version control system like git^, especially for work files (see also tutorial and gibak). You can install all this stuff easily via MacPorts.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:05 AM on January 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: What is crappy about Time Machine?
Time Machine capriciously updates and overrides files. You can never be certain if the latest version of a file is present or if a particular file is present. In an incident unrelated to the break-in, my MacBook Pro was wiped (with my knowledge ahead of time) by AppleCare. Prior to mailing my computer in, I did a backup with Time Machine (as I'd done every week) and sent it in.
When I got it back, I was able to restore it using Time Machine- to a configuration from six months prior to me mailing the computer in (e.g. I sent it in in September and it restored it to mid-March). Everything from that summer, pictures, files, etc, were all gone.
I called AppleCare in a panic and they told me, and I quote, "Time Machine is an archiving program, not a back up program. If you wish to back up your data, you should use another program". The level 2 tech I spoke to sympathized but said that since I started using Time Machine they have "clarified" what it is supposed to do, which is not apparently backing up data.
This issue can't be blamed on user error- my boyfriend, who used to work for Apple set it up and there were very few exclusions. We only excluded the system folder, everything else was included. We never interrupted a backup, etc- and it still totally screwed us. Capricious and unreliable would be a more accurate description than crappy, I think.
Sorry for the rant, but anyone else should know this before they lose six months of data because of a stupid program that doesn't do what it is supposed to do.
posted by arnicae at 4:07 PM on January 10, 2009
Time Machine capriciously updates and overrides files. You can never be certain if the latest version of a file is present or if a particular file is present. In an incident unrelated to the break-in, my MacBook Pro was wiped (with my knowledge ahead of time) by AppleCare. Prior to mailing my computer in, I did a backup with Time Machine (as I'd done every week) and sent it in.
When I got it back, I was able to restore it using Time Machine- to a configuration from six months prior to me mailing the computer in (e.g. I sent it in in September and it restored it to mid-March). Everything from that summer, pictures, files, etc, were all gone.
I called AppleCare in a panic and they told me, and I quote, "Time Machine is an archiving program, not a back up program. If you wish to back up your data, you should use another program". The level 2 tech I spoke to sympathized but said that since I started using Time Machine they have "clarified" what it is supposed to do, which is not apparently backing up data.
This issue can't be blamed on user error- my boyfriend, who used to work for Apple set it up and there were very few exclusions. We only excluded the system folder, everything else was included. We never interrupted a backup, etc- and it still totally screwed us. Capricious and unreliable would be a more accurate description than crappy, I think.
Sorry for the rant, but anyone else should know this before they lose six months of data because of a stupid program that doesn't do what it is supposed to do.
posted by arnicae at 4:07 PM on January 10, 2009
That's damn good to know. I just recently bought a pro and was planning on using Time Machine alone for backups. Glad I didn't make that mistake.
posted by middleclasstool at 7:41 PM on January 10, 2009
posted by middleclasstool at 7:41 PM on January 10, 2009
This hasn't been addressed yet, so I thought I'd chime in.
Many web hosting providers have strange and draconian Terms of Service. Most hosting providers do not include data backup as an acceptable use of their service (like the one I work for). This means that if your backups are against your hosting provider's ToS, your data runs the risk of being deleted with no notice or chance for recovery.
Call your hosting provider before you start uploading anything to make sure this use is covered in their ToS.
posted by phredgreen at 9:12 PM on January 10, 2009
Many web hosting providers have strange and draconian Terms of Service. Most hosting providers do not include data backup as an acceptable use of their service (like the one I work for). This means that if your backups are against your hosting provider's ToS, your data runs the risk of being deleted with no notice or chance for recovery.
Call your hosting provider before you start uploading anything to make sure this use is covered in their ToS.
posted by phredgreen at 9:12 PM on January 10, 2009
I see two likely causes for arnicae's issue with Time Machine :
(1) Apple pays reliability for performance improvements : rsync uses an O(files)ish algorithm which compares file modification dates, md5 signatures, etc. Time Machine uses an O(changes)ish algorithm where another service records changes. If changes are forgotten, then Time Machine misses those changes. If this happens then I'm likely fairly vulnerable myself because I often screw with shit, like killing mdimporter processes, disabling AirPortBaseStationAgent, etc.
(2) Apple isn't very good about recognizing drive usage conflicts : I've read about Time Machine being confused by its existing Backups.backupdb directory and creating some new directory, so all new backups went into the new directory, but restoration occurred from the old directory. But, in this case, I imagine arnicae might have found her pictures by manually exploring the Time Machine drive.
My ideal incremental/differential full system backup program would have two features : (a) bootable live latest copy, and (b) a full history ala rdiff-backup or rsync --link-dest. I'm not sure if the filesystem supports "copy-on-write" hard links, but that'd make the bootable requirement cake via rsync. Otherwise rdiff-backup does essentially this already, just without making bootable drives. I'm fairly sure ccc and sd are well behind on this history business.
Oh, I'm more serious about work backups, but never quite switched to nested git repositories, which seems like the ideal for important stuff.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:18 PM on January 10, 2009
(1) Apple pays reliability for performance improvements : rsync uses an O(files)ish algorithm which compares file modification dates, md5 signatures, etc. Time Machine uses an O(changes)ish algorithm where another service records changes. If changes are forgotten, then Time Machine misses those changes. If this happens then I'm likely fairly vulnerable myself because I often screw with shit, like killing mdimporter processes, disabling AirPortBaseStationAgent, etc.
(2) Apple isn't very good about recognizing drive usage conflicts : I've read about Time Machine being confused by its existing Backups.backupdb directory and creating some new directory, so all new backups went into the new directory, but restoration occurred from the old directory. But, in this case, I imagine arnicae might have found her pictures by manually exploring the Time Machine drive.
My ideal incremental/differential full system backup program would have two features : (a) bootable live latest copy, and (b) a full history ala rdiff-backup or rsync --link-dest. I'm not sure if the filesystem supports "copy-on-write" hard links, but that'd make the bootable requirement cake via rsync. Otherwise rdiff-backup does essentially this already, just without making bootable drives. I'm fairly sure ccc and sd are well behind on this history business.
Oh, I'm more serious about work backups, but never quite switched to nested git repositories, which seems like the ideal for important stuff.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:18 PM on January 10, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by procrastination at 9:13 AM on January 10, 2009 [1 favorite]