Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of LookingForITHelp
LookingForITHelp

asked on

bare metal restores? get back up an running faster?

I've run into 2 new clients in the last 2 weeks that had server hard drive failures and we had to rebuild their machines using their restore CD and then restore the data that they fortunately backed up.  A straigtforward process, but time consuming - install the OS from the CD, load all the patches that have come out since the CD was made, install drivers for hardware that wasn't on the CD (I would think Dell would build in their drivers on the restore CD without needing the driver CD seperately?!), install the backup software then restore the backup....

It's getting tiresome.  Nd you have people in the office waiting to get back up and running.

Is there a way to do a backup so we can do a 'bare metal' restore, I think it's called - I envision booting from a CD / floppy, deal with the drivers for the RAID controller, and simply restore the backup media to the hard drive, reboot and you are back to the time the backup was made.  Is that possible?  I think that's what ghost can do, at least for XP - not SBS?  Any others?  Will ghost or others work with hardware raid?  I keep reading how you have to do what I've been doing - reinstall the OS, install the backup app then restore from the backup media...  that takes time.
Avatar of Murat Raymond
Murat Raymond
Flag of United States of America image

Do a Shadow Copy of the entire System and Create an emergency repair disk. That is the fastest way.
SOLUTION
Avatar of Zadkin
Zadkin

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
I don't know how much your clients lose on being down for the day, if it runs into the thousands, you may want to consider a hosted inline backup solution.  I've done this with a couple of my customers, to where the data they need to continue running the operation is mirrored offsite, and if something went wrong, the employees all connected to the offsite servers via Terminal Services, where they find all their applications there, with their info, as if the server were still up.  One of my clients has calculated that it costs him over $20,000.00 a day to be down, so when I came up with a solution that cost 25K in Hardware & software, plus $500.00 a month for hosting, he didn't blink, just said, Do It.
Avatar of Jeffrey Kane - TechSoEasy
Probably the BEST way to keep from this is to get your clients to have the proper storage hardware to begin with.  I will only deploy a Small Business Server with a RAID 5 array which virtually eliminates the need for a bare metal restore unless there is some kind of catastrophic issue (fire, etc.).

There are MANY RAID 5 options, some with hot-swappable hard drives that you can replace while the server is still running -- no data loss.

These can be a bit pricey... but they compare quite equally to something like Acronis True Image or CA's new Business Protection Suite (http://www3.ca.com/smb/product.aspx?id=5436&culture=en-us).  However the savings comes in to play by not having to manage the additional backup procedures.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
Good Point Jeff, The only thing that has ever taken out any of my clients' RAID5 Arrays are hurricanes, but that's a once in 10 years type of problem.  However, with those types of catastrophies being a bit TOO common place here in S. Florida, I tend to think a bit more about Catastrophic events.
Avatar of LookingForITHelp
LookingForITHelp

ASKER

Jeff:  One of these problems was from a hard drive failure as part of hardware raid on a dell workstation...  dell came out, replaced the drive and when they installed the new drive, somehow corrupted the good drive.  the client called me to pick up the pieces.  the dell tech said that happens sometimes.  a) does that sound legit and b) could that happen when replacing the failed drive on a raid 5 system?

Sounds like it wasn't a RAID5, but rather a RAID0 or RAID1 (which only uses 2 drives) a RAID5 uses a minimum of 3 drives.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
Sorry, I meant to say RAID 1.  I thought best practices was raid 1 / raid 1 is 'better' than raid 5.  RAID 1 is less cost effective (you need 100% more drive space than what's usable) but better overall? I'm trying to think of statisitcs - which is more robust - 3 (or more) where if 2 fail at the same time, you are out of luck vs. 2 drives where 2 have to fail to be in trouble.  The more drives in the raid 5, the higher the chance that any 2 would fail at the same time?

SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
Quick question: Do you have access to the Direct Action Pack from Microsoft?
This would give you access to the Preinstall kit that can be used to ghost to new hardware. This would at least get you to the point of just installed when ghosted onto the hardware. You tehn need to update to the same level of patches and hotfixes as the last backup.

Alternatively, use ghost when you have finished setting up the server, ghost it to a hard drive or dvd and then if the server goes down, all you have to do is recover from the ghost image, update to the same patch level and then recover from your backup solution.

Regards,

David
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
Jeff - I may not be clear when I type, but do understand raid 5.  and from your link to wikipedia:  In RAID 5, where there is a single parity block per stripe, the failure of a second drive results in total data loss

I hadn't heard of more than 1 parity block before.  Interesting.  I suppose you use that?  How many parity blocks do you use?

Under the 'standard' config of raid 5, I think I have to disagree with your quote:

essentially if you had a 5 disk RAID 5 and for some very strange reason lost 2 at the same time, you would most likely still have ALL of your data.  So your concerns are really moot.

I am thinking if you lose 2 of those five drives, you are SOL.  Others have a thought on that?
You know... it all depends on the client and their needs.  Personally, I'm comfortable with a 5-disk RAID 5.  But I run full back-ups every night and keep one off-site every other day.  Plus, I then auto-upload accounting data to another off-site server every night.

That works for me and most of my clients... so I don't tend to venture any further in the realm of RAID arrays.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
LookingForITHelp, in a RAID 5 Array, only 1 drive may fail, and keep in mind that if you have to have 50% additional space for Parity, so if you have 5 disks, only 3 1/2 is used to hold Data, the other 1 1/2 are used for Parity.  In a RAID 6 Array, the Parity is distributed accross all drives, so if you have 6 or more drives, you can tolerate more than 1 drive failing, (same with RAID5+1, but RAID 6 Scales better).

There is a fairly new technology now though called RAIDn.  RAIDn uses distributed Parity like RAID6, but the algorithm uses a compression technique that allows for a 50% smaller Parity footprint.  The advantage is that if you were to let's say have 9 drives on a RAID 5 or 6 Array, you would have the equivalent 6 drives of storage space.  However, with RAIDn, you would have the equivalent of 7 drives of storage space, because of the tighter storage of Parity.  However, you would be limited to 2 drives failing.  Theoretically, you could have up to 3 drives fail, but if the drives were maxed out in storage, realistically, the max that could fail without losing data is 2.
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
I've just started testing Storagecraft's ShadowProtect IT edition (http://storagecraft.com) which provides a rather easy way to accomplish bare metal restores.  The ShadowProtect Server edition will be out later this month at $699.00.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
I'm experimenting with Acronis True Image (after years of using ghost).  Between these 2 for desktops / servers, ATI is the way to go.  I'm not familiar with shadowprotect, but ATI's server version is also hundreds of dollars / $1K.  At a recent meeting I was at, other techs were lamenting how the client will spend hundreds for SBS and all its bells and whistles....  and then need to spend another roughly same amount for the slim (infrequent?) need to do a quick restore of the OS capability?!
 
Well, you're right about that!  But generally it needs to be presented to the client at the time they are buying the server in order for them to understand that you can't buy one without the other.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
Jeff:

I think in previous threads you've been comfortable recommending the (free / included) SBS backup rather than another (paid) app for backups.  is that view starting to change? And you're liking these imaging apps rather than file backup apps?
No, it's not starting to change at all... for my clients, I recommend that their backup procedure include a minimum of THREE USB Hard drives.  Considering that I also recommend that they use the 1.5" drives, a 100GB drive will cost around $200.00, so it's still a $600.00 additional cost --- the same price as SBS Standard!

Jeff
TechSoEasy