A really great feature would be to add this to the retention rules...


Author
Message
alank2
alank2
New Member
New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14, Visits: 28
Add a "Purge the oldest backup set(s) if more than X GB".

I realize that the "Purge the oldest backup set(s) if less than X GB" is designed to deal with a low disk space situation, but sometimes a shared image drive is being used which holds backups from more than one job/pc.  The above added option would allow you to carve up a disk to allocate the desired amounts of space to each job.  For example with a 2TB disk, you could assign 1000 GB to the first job, 500 GB to the second job, etc.

This is probably a very simple feature to add/code.

Edited 14 June 2018 5:11 PM by alank2
Seekforever
Seekforever
Master
Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)Master (1.6K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K, Visits: 24K
You could partition the backup disk in 1000GB, 500GB, etc partitions for each job/PC and the existing method would work.
What usually happens with pre-assigned spaces is that sooner or later you will say, I should have made this one bigger and that one smaller.​
jphughan
jphughan
Macrium Evangelist
Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K, Visits: 85K
The purpose of the purge option is for people who would prefer to sacrifice their oldest sets, even before the retention policy would have purged them, rather than have new backups fail.  It's not meant to be used as a quota solution, because the appropriate way to manage storage consumed by a particular job is by setting an appropriate retention policy.  Granted, you don't get to choose a specific GB figure, but you shouldn't see significant unexpected growth in your backups under normal conditions anyway, unless maybe Reflect was forced to create a Full when you were expecting an Inc, as can sometimes occur after updating to a new release of Windows 10.  And in such a case where your storage requirements grew suddenly and unexpectedly, you might actually WANT to allow your backups to temporarily occupy more storage than normal instead of finding out that a potentially large quantity of older backups was purged unexpectedly.

Edited 14 June 2018 7:07 PM by jphughan
alank2
alank2
New Member
New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14, Visits: 28
Thanks seekforever - that is the strategy I am using because this feature is not present.  It is a pain to deal with multiple partitions though when an option like this would handle it so seamlessly.

jphaughan - the problem with retention policy is that you can't estimate with any certainty how large each backup is going be and so on.  Set it too low and you are sacrificing backups you don't need to, but set it too high and it will be inadequate causing it to fall back on the disk low retention anyway.  I hope they consider this option.  Macrium is really impressive and I think this feature fits right into the simple and effective approach it takes.

jphughan
jphughan
Macrium Evangelist
Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K, Visits: 85K
So adapting the wording of the current disk space purge option, you want a setting that says, "Purge the oldest set(s) if the total size of all backups exceeds XX GB on the target volume".  In this case, "all backups" would be defined based on whether you've selected "matching backups" or "all backups in the destination folder" in the dropdown above your retention policy settings.  I guess I see some value there, but if I had to guess why it doesn't already exist, it would probably be that storage is so cheap these days, and backups are typically so important, that most people would consider how many backups they want to keep and then make sure they have enough storage to retain that number of backups, rather than shrugging and saying, "I'll take whatever I can get with X amount of storage."  Retention policy should determine storage capacity, not the other way around.

Or is your thinking basically, "I expect my allocated storage will be enough for what I actually need, but as long as the backups stay within that limit, I want to let them continue accumulating just because"?  In that case, depending on your schedule, if you had this option it would probably make the most sense to just disable the Full retention policy entirely so that backup set growth would be completely unrestricted except by this total size limit. It might also make sense to disable the other retention policies as well.  In the latter case, the catch is that you'd only ever purge by entire sets rather than individual backups, but with frequent Fulls that wouldn't necessarily be a problem. In fact, you'd want to have fairly frequent Fulls anyway to make sure that a "set purge" triggered by this setting or the existing disk space purge mechanism wouldn't wipe out too many backups.

In my own case, I've always just retained what I needed, and if I don't need it, then I don't retain it.  So I set my retention policy according to my needs, and if I underestimated the storage requirement, then I add more storage.  If I instead have storage left over, then I don't feel any need to use it for backups that I've already decided I don't need.  Maybe it's my "anti-clutter" mentality, which itself may be the result of being the son of a collector. Tongue

Anyhow, this should probably be created in the Wish List section, even if the thread you create there just contains a link to this thread.

Edited 14 June 2018 8:52 PM by jphughan
alank2
alank2
New Member
New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14, Visits: 28
Your first paragraph is it exactly!

jphughan
jphughan
Macrium Evangelist
Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K, Visits: 85K
Ok, thinking about it more, I'm seeing more cases where this could make sense.  I guess for every "anti-clutter" person like me there's someone else who just as reasonably figures, "If I have hard drive space, I might as well use it for something!"  So I've added this to my "Aggregated quick win feature requests" thread I've been maintaining in the Wish List section (link), which contains some of my own ideas as well as others I've found scattered in all sections of the forum.  This idea seems to fit the criteria I used for building that list, and that way it will have a presence in the Wish List section.  Macrium has even implemented a few of the features on that list, although I confess not as many as I'd hoped by now.  Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised for Reflect V8. Smile

Edited 14 June 2018 11:18 PM by jphughan
alank2
alank2
New Member
New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)New Member (21 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14, Visits: 28
Super - thanks!

GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search