Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 66210 2006-02-15 02:06:00 backup to dvd program dolby digital (5073) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
430521 2006-02-15 02:06:00 Hi,

I need a program to copy large files to dvd. These files are backup files and therefore are quite large 8GB+. I have tried Nero express, Deepburner and a few others and they will not copy to more than one dvd i.e. 4.5GB is the limit and cannot get the 8GB onto 2 dvd's. Any suggestions?
dolby digital (5073)
430522 2006-02-15 02:10:00 i wonder if thats cause DVD is only 4.7gig. you'll need to spilt the files or use dual layer disks. tweak'e (69)
430523 2006-02-15 02:18:00 What OS are you using? Mackin_NZ (6958)
430524 2006-02-15 02:28:00 Winzip 10 Pro will backup to cd or DVD.

It looks like it zips whatever to cd or DVD.

And will also span across cd's or dvd's.

But it may only do this, once its registered.
Speedy Gonzales (78)
430525 2006-02-15 02:38:00 I use a program called "Genie Backup Manager Pro" which I have been using for a few years now. The program will easily backup to multiple disks (2 are the most I have ever needed) and will also backup to other media.
They also have a home edition available.

www.genie-soft.com/

hope this helps,
Dave
Davoid (6918)
430526 2006-02-15 03:34:00 Could just use a dual layer dvd. Nyuuji (5460)
430527 2006-02-15 04:12:00 I would not be happy with a single "backup" file which is that size. I assume it's compressed. What happens if you have a non-zero error rate? I know that the hard error rate for DVDs is claimed to be between 1 in 10^12 and 1 in 10^15. I don't believe them. A range of 3 orders of magnitude is not exactly reassuring. :D And if the range goes down, not up, you'd be in the 10^9 area. That is, seriously in the pooh.

Have you ever tried reading a backup file that size? Telecom found out a while ago that untested backups aren't backups at all. They loaded "improved" software in their exchanges. It didn't work. The backup tapes weren't readable. They lost half the North Island exchanges for quite a long time.
Graham L (2)
430528 2006-02-15 06:31:00 I could only find dual layer write once dvd's... I presume rewritable's are out there.

Graham, I suggested a DAT tape drive and 40GB tapes but the budget is not there at the moment. I hear what you say about the reliability of dvd media. As an aside, a local radio station is going to bury a time capsule under the new Wellington suburban motorway and are going to put messages and songs onto cd to include. When someone digs it up in 500 years, if they can find something to play it on, it will be so degraded that it will be rubbish.

Evan the old 9 channel tapes had parity issues sometimes. I used to watch the tapes retry bad areas (now I'm showing my age). I did consider taking 2 copies of each backup file "just in case".
dolby digital (5073)
430529 2006-02-16 00:51:00 I wrote programmes to write 9-track tapes. (I even counted the retries needed and wrote that to the log file, so I could track the condition of tapes).The retries were in the writing. The heads had two gaps; the data written were read back immediately (with a more severe signal strength requirement than normal writing) and compared by the drive hardware. The procedure was: backspace over the block, write a filemark (3" of erased tape, and a mark), backspace over the mark, rewrite the block. I didn't like more than 20 goes at this ... 5 feet of blank tape, though most systems had a limit of 20 feet blank before timing out on read.

But it was a very reliable medium. Unfortunately, even the GCR "6250 bpi" format could only handle a bit over 100 MB. Part of the reliability lay in having at least two tapes with the same data. People who used only one tape were looking for trouble. One guy I know of got it. The operators mounted his tape instead of one of mine, and I wrote 1900 feet worth of data on it. Of course the hardware could do things too. A 100 ips drive has powerful motors to accelerate the tape to that speed in 3/8". I've seen 1/2" wide tape stretched to be 1/8" wide when the servos went wrong.
Graham L (2)
1