Hi forum,
I am very careful about keeping an eye on System Restore points but I think I may have made an incorrect move.

I recently made a "vssadmin" alteration to storage space on my main drive (C) to 3GB. I now appear to have a lost a restore point which backdated to 3 weeks ago when the PC was running perfectly. This only occured after the change. I know this point is now lost forever.
However to avoid this happening in future at what figure should this be set in future.? Some recommend 30% of free space on the drive which, in my case, would be around 50GB. All the other recommendations say 3GB. Very puzzled by all this and would appreciate assistance. I like to keep points dating back a while as a precaution.

Hello Richard,
Happy 2011 to you. Thanks for your reply but most of the threads proved a little difficult to understand being non too technical.

My basic question is: what level should I set Shadow Storage at in order NOT TO LOSE earlier points ? Does a 3GB setting prove inadequate in this regard as opposed to one higher e.g. 39GB ? Surely the larger value would retain these earlier points better. I cannot grasp the principle. By the way the Macrium idea seems a good deal and updating once a month would get round this whole Vista restore thing.
Peter

Thanks, Richard, that seems to be about it though I am still not fully understanding of the matter..my fault. However, the Macrium seems to be a very good idea making a full back up of the complete system and updating from time to time. To me this is preferable to System Restore. I did try Paragon on one occasion but found it a little unwieldy so maybe this new system will work. Many thanks..hope the snow is not too bad where you are... we have just lost ours in Ireland. Peter

Hi BluePeter,

IMHO, a full image restore makes sense once you reach a certain point (and that can vary - I'd say 8 weeks is certainly a maximum but possibly if not probably somewhat sooner). It also depends on how well you keep it updated and current - but that's your responsibility.

On the other hand, if you make a simple mistake and hose the system somehow, a System Restore is a much better option to recover from that error. The same holds true if you go back a week or two or maybe even more (whatever you set as the cutoff between the two procedures).

I suggest you set a timeframe where you will do a System Restore and one where you will do an image restore and set your system restore space to match that decision. Keep in mind that System Restore doesn't always work, so you may need to image restore earlier than planned in the event of some very serious problem (like an infection by something extremely nasty). Until the process is defined and in place, then go with Richard's suggestion of 8 weeks just to be on the safe side (assuming you have the space for that). Also remember that the image restore is only as good as its last update - anything after that will be lost (INCLUDING documents - which a System Restore does not affect and that can be good or bad depending on the problem).

I hope this helps.

Good luck!

Hi Peter,

Here's how I handle backups and restores:

I make a System Restore point before any installation or update and otherwise daily and keep enough room to give me about 6 weeks worth of restore points.

I do a complete image backup monthly - that I store in a different place than everything else (actually, in my safe).

I do a full backup weekly and incremental backups every other day or so (depends on how much I did that day and whether or not I'm concerned about losing it). I do this constantly - replacing the full backup and the incremental backups every week (as I don't have enough space to store many) and do so regardless of whether or not I just did a complete image backup even that same day.

Unlike Richard, I do not have an image backup of the initial system tucked away for a dire emergency. If I find the money for another external HDD, I may very well consider doing so (at least from where I am now) as it's a good idea.

And that's my process. In some ways, it's more conservative and in some ways it's less conservative. But I'm comfortable with it and it hasn't failed me (well, to be honest, I've never needed to restore from backup on any of my own systems - knock on wood).

As Richard said, there are many alternatives but the main points are that the process is safe enough to offer real protection, that you are comfortable with it, that you have the equipment to do the plan you choose, and that whatever you choose you will follow-through with it (because if you choose one that requires more effort than you're willing to put into it, then you'll skip steps and that can defeat the purpose of the plan).

I hope this helps.

Good luck!