Sadly, a firend was persuaded by his son-in-law to do just that, installing
a duplicate hard drive with mirroring software to provide the backup.
Somehow the file allocation table on the master drive was corrupted - and
the mirroring software did precisely what it said on the tin, duplicating
the error on what had been the backup.
Both disk are with recovery specialists as I type, trying to reconstitute
the FAT for either disk to recover tens of GB of image data. The data are
all, without exception, present and uncorrupted on the disk. It's just not
obvius what sequence they should be in...
But I do agree about the principle - I have a 120GB external USB disk with
Iomega Auto Backup software running daily on my user data, and occasional
Norton Ghost backups of the entire C: drive.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Winsor Crosby
Sent: 15 June 2005 16:22
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Progress report on crashed hard drive
--snip
If you use a hard drive backup you have a check on it every time you add
some additional files. It seems to me that the chances of their both failing
at the same time is slim.
--snip
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|