<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: File Replication Engine UI proposal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/</link>
	<description>BackupAssist blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 22:14:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Portch</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Portch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:20:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-39</guid>
		<description>All of these improvements look fantastic and we are really looking forward to this as extended times of existing full backups are thrashing servers nowdays and mirroring is the answer. Having users be able to logon to backup data while it is restoring back to new hard disk would be good feature. Like relpication software can do. Also my big thing this year is trying to inform users/ companies what is being backed up and where etc. so the monitoring alerting and reporting of backups mirroring etc. could really be beefed up to give various reports with maybe graphs etc. This would help us place some burden for the backups back towards the clients who after all should be involved in their backups which we administer for them.

Also would like to see some deduplification tools appearing to help guide our clients on keeping data sizes down.

Nick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All of these improvements look fantastic and we are really looking forward to this as extended times of existing full backups are thrashing servers nowdays and mirroring is the answer. Having users be able to logon to backup data while it is restoring back to new hard disk would be good feature. Like relpication software can do. Also my big thing this year is trying to inform users/ companies what is being backed up and where etc. so the monitoring alerting and reporting of backups mirroring etc. could really be beefed up to give various reports with maybe graphs etc. This would help us place some burden for the backups back towards the clients who after all should be involved in their backups which we administer for them.</p>
<p>Also would like to see some deduplification tools appearing to help guide our clients on keeping data sizes down.</p>
<p>Nick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell Clements</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell Clements</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 02:11:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-12</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d like to be able to take a backup at a client site and put it on a RAID 5 array at my location and just have incremental, single instance backup sent from client site to my site (or a service) to have an off-site backup with minimal traffic.

I&#039;d like to have the ability to right click on the backup file and mount it as a drive letter to just drag and drop files that need to be recovered.  

Are you having a beta program for this?  I may be able to get you some volunteers for it from the DFW-SBS group.  I&#039;m not sure what kind of traction SBS 2008 is going to get right out of the gate.  

This single instance storage capability sounds like a great thing for small businesses.  

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the design process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d like to be able to take a backup at a client site and put it on a RAID 5 array at my location and just have incremental, single instance backup sent from client site to my site (or a service) to have an off-site backup with minimal traffic.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to have the ability to right click on the backup file and mount it as a drive letter to just drag and drop files that need to be recovered.  </p>
<p>Are you having a beta program for this?  I may be able to get you some volunteers for it from the DFW-SBS group.  I&#8217;m not sure what kind of traction SBS 2008 is going to get right out of the gate.  </p>
<p>This single instance storage capability sounds like a great thing for small businesses.  </p>
<p>Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the design process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linus</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Linus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 00:30:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-11</guid>
		<description>Over the last 2 days, I&#039;ve received a fair amount of feedback via email. I&#039;ve posted this feedback here, so that we can all share the ideas and hopefully build an awesome product!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Over the last 2 days, I&#8217;ve received a fair amount of feedback via email. I&#8217;ve posted this feedback here, so that we can all share the ideas and hopefully build an awesome product!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 00:28:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-10</guid>
		<description>Dear Linus,

I’m very interested in your new File Replication Engine. With ever increasing amounts of data to backup and large removable disks, incremental replication makes much more sense than full backups – especially where combined with single instance storage.

I support a number of clients who are using BackupAssist and like its simplicity and excellent reporting. However, some are moving towards MS DPM because of its efficiency in the backup traffic and superfast restore times. But it is complex and its tape management is a nightmare.

So I see a good but simpler file replication system would have great appeal. Given the lower overall traffic it is quite feasible to replicate a number of systems to a server/disk system in a nearby building via 1Gb Ethernet and so improve security and protection of the backed up data. The DPM model is to then stream this backed up store to tape at predefined intervals which can of course be done during the day without impact on the main systems.

Of course for single remote servers with a USB disk for backup the replication model also works well – so long as it can cope with a swap of the USB disk on regular intervals. One client is doing this with Robocopy and as all the USB disks in his rotation are named the same the server doesn’t seem to notice the change. But it would be great to have better control over the whole process though.

DPM of course understands SQL, Exchange and Virtual Machines data, but I know you do too so incorporating them (perhaps as an add-in) would be helpful but not essential to the basic product.

I hope this helps and look forward to hearing more about your development.


Regards

Mark</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Linus,</p>
<p>I’m very interested in your new File Replication Engine. With ever increasing amounts of data to backup and large removable disks, incremental replication makes much more sense than full backups – especially where combined with single instance storage.</p>
<p>I support a number of clients who are using BackupAssist and like its simplicity and excellent reporting. However, some are moving towards MS DPM because of its efficiency in the backup traffic and superfast restore times. But it is complex and its tape management is a nightmare.</p>
<p>So I see a good but simpler file replication system would have great appeal. Given the lower overall traffic it is quite feasible to replicate a number of systems to a server/disk system in a nearby building via 1Gb Ethernet and so improve security and protection of the backed up data. The DPM model is to then stream this backed up store to tape at predefined intervals which can of course be done during the day without impact on the main systems.</p>
<p>Of course for single remote servers with a USB disk for backup the replication model also works well – so long as it can cope with a swap of the USB disk on regular intervals. One client is doing this with Robocopy and as all the USB disks in his rotation are named the same the server doesn’t seem to notice the change. But it would be great to have better control over the whole process though.</p>
<p>DPM of course understands SQL, Exchange and Virtual Machines data, but I know you do too so incorporating them (perhaps as an add-in) would be helpful but not essential to the basic product.</p>
<p>I hope this helps and look forward to hearing more about your development.</p>
<p>Regards</p>
<p>Mark</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 00:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Hi , been a while, hope you are well.
 
We definitely have this as an issue and would love to see the replication engine
 
Most common requirements - 
 
Replication of image repository to multiple external drive
Replication of Images from NAS to NAS
 
 
Happy to open a dialogue.
 
Cheers
 
 
Steve</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi , been a while, hope you are well.</p>
<p>We definitely have this as an issue and would love to see the replication engine</p>
<p>Most common requirements &#8211; </p>
<p>Replication of image repository to multiple external drive<br />
Replication of Images from NAS to NAS</p>
<p>Happy to open a dialogue.</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Steve</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aruna</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Aruna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 00:27:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-8</guid>
		<description>Hi there i&#039;m happy to hear that we are going to make this fantastic product even better . I may suggest we use technology similar to ter copy which works well with large files.
 
At the moment i&#039;m using script to move a 140gb backup file to removable hds it works well this way because BA backups to the always attached drive first then it copies to the removable drive. but because of the system I lose features like media management (how many copy&#039;s I keep in the removable drives ) and reporting, so it will be fantastic to have this new feature.
 
Also important is to keep BA using the internal HD as backup destination first and then copying to the destination.  
 
Thanks fro you effort 
 
 
Aruna</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi there i&#8217;m happy to hear that we are going to make this fantastic product even better . I may suggest we use technology similar to ter copy which works well with large files.</p>
<p>At the moment i&#8217;m using script to move a 140gb backup file to removable hds it works well this way because BA backups to the always attached drive first then it copies to the removable drive. but because of the system I lose features like media management (how many copy&#8217;s I keep in the removable drives ) and reporting, so it will be fantastic to have this new feature.</p>
<p>Also important is to keep BA using the internal HD as backup destination first and then copying to the destination.  </p>
<p>Thanks fro you effort </p>
<p>Aruna</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rupesh</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Rupesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 00:25:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-7</guid>
		<description>I hope in your new version you have a feature where only files of specific dates are backed up ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope in your new version you have a feature where only files of specific dates are backed up ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Curt</title>
		<link>http://www.backupassist.com/blog/dev/file-replication-engine-ui-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>Curt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 06:49:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.backupassist.com/blog/?p=7#comment-6</guid>
		<description>I love the idea of file copy backup with deduplication.

 

Please provide for:

encryption of files on backup disk

multiple backups on ONE disk

disk rotation on GFS, but one disk for weekdays, one for weekends, one for Month, but switch to DVD for yearly backups.

 

Backup Assist is a wonderful program!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love the idea of file copy backup with deduplication.</p>
<p>Please provide for:</p>
<p>encryption of files on backup disk</p>
<p>multiple backups on ONE disk</p>
<p>disk rotation on GFS, but one disk for weekdays, one for weekends, one for Month, but switch to DVD for yearly backups.</p>
<p>Backup Assist is a wonderful program!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

