A backup workflow - keeping 2 external HD's in sync

[hiroi]

Hello all,

Long time lurker, first time poster here.

I would like some suggestions on a backup workflow. Currently I manually back up: photos, audio, video, work related files to an external hard drive. Yesterday I bought an additional external hard drive in case the first drive fails...

I am ok with the manual backup part (open to better solutions...), however I would like to regularly copy over the files to the new hard drive so that they are both in sync.

Do I need an application like SuperDuper, Carbon Copy Cloner, Chronosync?

Thanks

 

[chabig]

I use three drives. Time Machine runs on one drive for versioned automatic backup. One of the remaining two disks is attached and make scheduled clones (I do it once a week using SuperDuper, but CCC works great too). I keep the third drive offsite and swap it monthly with the second drive. If my house burns down l will lose no more than a month’s worth of changes. Anything that I can’t bear to lose and must be backed up immediately is stored in the cloud (iCloud, Dropbox, OneDrive, etc.). I also run Arq and it makes encrypted online backups of everything every 96 hours to two separate cloud accounts.

 

[hiroi]

I use three drives. Time Machine runs on one drive for versioned automatic backup. One of the remaining two disks is attached and make scheduled clones (I do it once a week using SuperDuper, but CCC works great too). I keep the third drive offsite and swap it monthly with the second drive. If my house burns down l will lose no more than a month’s worth of changes. Anything That I can’t bear to lose and must be backed up immediately is stored in the cloud (iCloud, Dropbox, OneDrive, etc.). I also run Arq and it makes encrypted online backups of everything every 96 hours to two separate cloud accounts.

Wow, bulletproof.

I'll look into SuperDuper, CCC, Chronosync then. I assume they will be much more efficient than my manual efforts. Is it possible for me to use time machine on one of my two drives (or both if easier...)? As opposed to getting a third drive?

 

[chabig]

You could set up both drives as Time Machine drives and keep one offsite, swapping them periodically. That’s a pretty good way to use two drives. Anything that runs automatically is probably more reliable than you having to remember to do it.

 

[hiroi]

You could set up both drives as Time Machine drives and keep one offsite, swapping them periodically. That’s a pretty good way to use two drives. Anything that runs automatically is probably more reliable than you having to remember to do it.

Do I need to create a partition to do that?

 

[chabig]

No. In the time machine preference pane you can add a second drive. Time Machine will use whichever one is attached. If both are attached at the same time it alternates backups.

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/use-multiple-hard-drives-time-machine/

 

[hobowankenobi]

You could set up both drives as Time Machine drives and keep one offsite, swapping them periodically. That’s a pretty good way to use two drives. Anything that runs automatically is probably more reliable than you having to remember to do it.

Or at least a fire-proof safe. Not quite as good as off site, but protects from most possible disasters.

SuperDuper and CCC are great. Get Backup is really good for the price, and a bit more simple to use. Any of them can make a full boot-able clone, as well as versioned backups. Both important to have.

If it is not automatic, it's not a real backup.

 

[Fishrrman]

hobo wrote:
"SuperDuper and CCC are great. Get Backup is really good for the price, and a bit more simple to use. Any of them can make a full boot-able clone, as well as versioned backups. Both important to have."

This makes sense.

"If it is not automatic, it's not a real backup."

This... doesn't.

 

[hobowankenobi]

"If it is not automatic, it's not a real backup."

This... doesn't.

Sure it does. I did not invent that saying; it has been heard throughout enterprise IT departments for decades.

Manual copies are notoriously fraught with peril, when it comes to restoring after a disaster. Too often users miss something, are unaware of things needed, forget, or simply do something wrong, and data is lost.

A manual copy is just that...a copy. Any decent backup system is automated, scheduled, has some type of versioning, and error capture/alerts and logs of what worked, and what did not.

Just the word backup implies a process that is much more than a manual copy, at least in the IT world.

I would not even use a manual copy to migrate a file server in a single move. Too many chances of problems. Any of the tools listed in this thread would do it while providing great confidence (along with a detailed log) that a Finder copy could not. You haven't lived until you are half a day (or more) into copying data only to find an random error halts the process...

 

[hiroi]

Thanks all. I seem to have gravitated towards trying out Carbon Copy Cloner.

 

[hobowankenobi]

Thanks all. I seem to have gravitated towards trying out Carbon Copy Cloner.

Good call. Arguably the best too out there, and with 30 days free, no risk to beat it up. GetBackup and others have free trial periods, so a good time to compare.

Don't forget to do some test restores...as no backup process is complete unless you know and have practiced restoring; figuring it out after a disaster is not the fun way to learn.