Is it considered poor practice to store backup images within an archive?
Is it considered poor practice to store backup images within an archive?
I use Marcum Reflect to generate standard image files of my Windows 10 OS. To conserve storage space, I often combine it with Winzip/Winrar to include it in an archive (reducing file size while keeping it on my backup drive).
I'm curious if this approach is acceptable or might lead to problems or corruption later. So far, I haven't experienced any issues when extracting it.
I wouldn't do it.
I handle compressed files somewhat... usually with mp3 files that aren't very important in either direction. I've had a few issues I couldn't fix—corruption, oddities, unknowns.
You should think about the relative value:
Access to a Macrium image. Probably not a big deal for you...
versus
Saving space on a drive. That seems really important to you?
I'd lean toward the first, but it looks like you prioritize saving space more than you realize. Whatever your reason.
Certain backup programs allow compressing images. When you have several versions, you might choose to keep only the older ones in a compressed state.
Yeah; Macrium images are compressed at a "medium" setting by default. A "high" compression option exists, but my tests showed it doesn't save much extra space. It could still help reduce your worries about storage and make RAR files unnecessary. Images are already quite complex, so adding another program to handle them might be overkill, but if you're worried about drive space, it might be worth considering.
Seconding
@Lafong
I recommend increasing the available storage and removing the need to compress files. Also, keep in mind that having several backup copies stored in various locations is essential. These backups have been confirmed as recoverable and readable. If only one backup exists, any issues will make file compression irrelevant. It seems adding more drives or space could be a practical solution for you.
The actual storage capacity increases are minimal. I wouldn't recommend it.
In my observations regarding 5-10% between medium and high, possibly doubling the time. Incremental produces a bit more, while differential is smaller. The same issue occurs with all compression methods; some files are more compressible than others, while others aren't as much.
In reality, each Increment should be smaller than the Diffs.
Incremental represents the changes compared to the previous Incremental.
Differential captures every change since the last Full Image.
As time progresses, the Diffs increase significantly.
However, for recovery purposes, you must have all the Incrementals from the last Full.
With Differentials, you only need the original Full and the latest Differential.
Yes, you're correct about incremental backups. Due to regular testing of the operating system, software, and hardware, I maintain the last three incremental backups. This approach creates a combined file that expands over time, currently reducing its size to roughly half of the original full backup.