locked
Make it Simple Please - HOW does one INCLUDE a file with an unlisted file extension? RRS feed

  • Question

  • My apologies up front for a bit of a rant, but please don't answer this question with a link to somewhere that does NOT give the answer!

     

    I've read Jim's and Steve's answers to most of the postings that turn up when one searches for "include".  However there are no answers. One guy asks specifically how do you INCLUDE a file to be backed up?  You'all answer that "Yes you can", and "follow this thread", and "It's hard to find, but you can...." - no one lists the actual steps.

     

    C:\Program Files\New Program\data.DB

     

    1. What steps are used to include that specific file?

    2. What steps are needed to include "MDB" as a file extension to be included, wherever it resides, on all future backups.

     

     

    Sunday, July 29, 2007 12:01 PM

Answers

  •  

    MDB is a supported type . It belongs to the other Category in the CategorySelection Page .  Please see mostly all file types ( except system files etc ) which donot belong to a particular category ( say picture , music , docs etc) BELONG TO  the OTHER CATEGORY FILE .

     

    This category includes mostly all remaining file types .

     

    The problem with the PajamaGuys backup is that his file is located in the ProgarmFIles Folder. OneCare backup has some list of Globally excluded folders from which it does not backup anything . Nor does OneCare give any option to include anything from these folders.

     

    Program Files is one such globally excluded folder . So any file ( say a pic file , or a doc file or in ur case a MDB file ) will not be picked for backup from this folder

     

    SOlution: please copy this file to your desktop or any other folder . Adn then it will be automatically backed up . To confirm this ,you can check that the file is listed in the 'Other Category' category .

     

    Thanks

    Rock

    Monday, July 30, 2007 9:20 AM

All replies

  • Are you using the 2.0 beta or the 1.6 production version? The process differs for both.

    In the 2.0 beta you include a location - a folder - by adding it to the backup location after you initially proceed through the wizard. As far as I know, .mdb files are already included in the backups for both versions.

    No link from me. I need to spend more time with the 2.0 backup as it is confusing right now and I don't want to steer you wrong in how to do it.

     

    -steve

     

    Monday, July 30, 2007 1:59 AM
    Moderator
  • Sorry Steve, no you can't include a folder any longer with WLOC 2.0 (see the Backup FAQ for the explanation) and no MDB is not an included file type (search for Backup Type in Instant Support).

     

    I'll reserve judgement on the lack of an Inclusion ability until I can fully test and determine if everything I require is really being included in the backup. Actually, I already know it isn't, since I previously used the Include Folder option for a few installers (EXE file type) that now can't be backed up. However, I do understand the reasoning, though I feel this will irritate many since it likely precludes the ability to automatically include installation and other self extracting files using this extension. Removing this simple workaround (Inclusion dialog) is foolish in my mind, because there can never be an absolutely complete list of types and someone will always have a good reason to backup something not included. I'm also quite certain that it created many support issues though, since non-technical users might believe they could backup programs or even the entire OS using this option.

     

    As for the MDB type, I'm guessing the issue is that these files are always held open, so they can't be properly backed up anyway. In this case you'd need to create a backup using the SQL maintenance facility and then back that file up instead, However, since this defaults to a file type of BAK, I don't believe you can back that up either so it may not be possible. I haven't tried this, however, so this is just a guess from what I've discovered thus far.

     

    Before anyone begins to rant, please read the entire Backup FAQ and then test it yourself. I understand the logic here, but if you read carefully, they seem to think they'll cover all important data automatically. I disagree, but I can't prove it yet since I really haven't tested my guesses above, so I can't condem what I can't prove. Nor should anyone else, so please test before you complain.

     

    OneCareBear

    Monday, July 30, 2007 5:57 AM
    Moderator
  •  

    MDB is a supported type . It belongs to the other Category in the CategorySelection Page .  Please see mostly all file types ( except system files etc ) which donot belong to a particular category ( say picture , music , docs etc) BELONG TO  the OTHER CATEGORY FILE .

     

    This category includes mostly all remaining file types .

     

    The problem with the PajamaGuys backup is that his file is located in the ProgarmFIles Folder. OneCare backup has some list of Globally excluded folders from which it does not backup anything . Nor does OneCare give any option to include anything from these folders.

     

    Program Files is one such globally excluded folder . So any file ( say a pic file , or a doc file or in ur case a MDB file ) will not be picked for backup from this folder

     

    SOlution: please copy this file to your desktop or any other folder . Adn then it will be automatically backed up . To confirm this ,you can check that the file is listed in the 'Other Category' category .

     

    Thanks

    Rock

    Monday, July 30, 2007 9:20 AM
  • Thanks, Rock.

    The workaround, if possible, is to move the file out of \Program Files. However, that may not be possible for some people.

    This change to OneCare backup is not desirable - the inability to select a specific file to be backed up or not backing up all files within a folder. While some changes are good, these two are steps backwards.

    I trust that someone will be filing a bug or two on Connect for these issues?

    -steve

     

    Tuesday, July 31, 2007 1:12 AM
    Moderator
  • Wow, even more completely useless workarounds they make you do now. They need to learn that their illogical thinking on these issues is killing this product and pushing more people to the competition.

     

    I'm glad you guys are finding the workarounds and posting them to help people but the dev team needs to fix this stuff properly instead of depending on band-aid fixes.

     

    This feature is such a no brainer to be added. I can't believe how inconsiderate they are being towards their customers.

     

    I really do feel like someone is trying to destroy this product.

     

    They must be running scared that the competition will say something. I never thought I would see Microsoft run like this.

    Tuesday, July 31, 2007 3:10 AM
  • A clarification is in order on this one, Scortch. It isn't that the ability to add a folder for backup or add a specific file to be backed up needs to be "added" to the backup functionality, it needs to be *restored* to the backup functionality as removing the ability to select a folder or a file to be backed up is in the current released 1.6 version.

    -steve

    Tuesday, July 31, 2007 5:50 PM
    Moderator
  • OK, I finally had the time to look closely at both the entire Backup FAQ post and the Backup Configuration itself. How and also why these changes were made became clear almost immediately. Though Sundar's FAQ post is of course accurate, it reads like it's written by a programmer (rules), so how it really works became more clear to me after I did some browsing through the Configuration dialogs, which is more important from a usage perspective.

     

    Duke_Of_Wizard did a fine job of explaining the answer to the original question, but his response was also somewhat limited as a result, so it didn't completely fill in the blanks for me until I looked at it myself.

     

    The key item I haven't seen mentioned is that all folders at the root of the system drive other than the Program Files and Windows System folders are included in the Exclude folders or files dialog, along with the complete user profile folder structure. This allows the backup (or exclusion) of all supported (non-executable) file types contained in the user's folder structure.

     

    The attempt here is to encompass all possible user files by default, requiring the user to specifically exclude what they don't wish to backup, meaning by default they should receive a complete 'foolproof' data backup. This is a laudable goal and exactly what OneCare was intended to do, and it does come much closer than it had originally.

     

    The flaw here is that the scope of what is 'data' to the user is being limited. Though this logic will work for most, it removes the ability to treat a self-extracting executable file (installer, maybe even packed picture or other files) as data, which may be important to some users. Note that the MS Installer file type (MSI) is supported for backup though.

     

    I can see the reasoning for blocking both executable file types and the Program Files and Windows folder structures, since we know that some have assumed they could backup programs or the Windows OS itself using OneCare, which simply isn't true except for very rare simple programs. This design avoids that issue as well as making a quite complete, foolproof data backup for all but a very few users.

     

    The original question about MDB types that began this thread would probably always require that the file be moved from its original location, as I don't believe a database file could be backed up directly by OneCare, since they are normally held open by the SQL engine. So though the file may be available for backup when moved elsewhere, I don't think that an Inclusion feature would be of any additional value in this case.

     

    I'm finding that I'm torn between what I see as the most complete foolproof solution yet attained and my own wishes for an 'Advanced' Inclusion feature. Though I rarely used the ability to backup a self-extracting file myself, I did have occasion to use the ability, so I'm certain others have also. However, I also can't think of any that I couldn't have recovered by returing to the original source, so I'd have to consider this convenience rather than neccessity.

     

    I think that anyone with a complaint about this must show that their backup scanario has actually been broken by the change and also that there's a compelling reason that it must be supported. I'm afraid I can't say that of my own situation.

     

    OneCareBear

    Wednesday, August 1, 2007 4:39 AM
    Moderator
  • Thanks for looking into this further, OneCareBear. One clarification - MDB files are Access Database files and are not locked by the SQL engine for copying when open. So, the inability to backup this file type if located in \Program Files is simply because you *can't* include \Program Files in the backup filter...

    -steve

     

    Wednesday, August 1, 2007 3:24 PM
    Moderator
  • Guess I confused them with SQL since they both originally used the Jet engine technology, though local MDB files are often served using MDAC, which might still cause a conflict. I'm not really certain if MDAC/Jet actually locks the file however, it may just be a concern if the file was in the process of being changed while the backup was being performed.

     

    In either case, I don't recommend backing up a database file that isn't in a completely closed status, unless the backup process is database aware and can read the database via the engine. I don't believe that WLOC is designed to perform this type of backup process, rather it only performs a simple file copy type backup.

     

    OneCareBear

     

    Wednesday, August 1, 2007 5:36 PM
    Moderator
  • Well thanks guys!  Great answers.

    I rolled back to 1.6 and am including the file in the backups.

    I did post a bug on the WOC Connect site.

     

    I have some comments - While I'm certainly not an expert, I consider myself an advanced user.  My MS BetaId is 162985 - which should let you know I have only a few gray hairs left.

     

    The first problem is that in upgrading from 1.6 to 2.0 - nothing popped up large enough or bright enough, or persistent enough to inform me that I'd lost my "Include files & folders" settings.  I just let it roll on thinking I was still safe!

     

    The file in question stores my wife's blood pressure and heart rate data from her Omron automated blood pressure monitor. Not only for our viewing, but also for printing out for her doctor.  So I kinda wanted to make sure the file is being backed up. For the record - I have no control over where the data file is located (bad design, I know, but that's the way it is).  And to suggest I copy the file to a location that is backed up is kinda redundant. 

     

    (I have to research it but I think the details of the "My Documents" file types for 2.0 did NOT include MDB, whereas I think 1.6 disregards file extensions within that folder)

     

    When I couldn't find it in the backup set, I started investigating - hence this thread.

     

    I have to ask, "Why is MS screwing with it?" - With 1.6 we could backup everything in My Docs, files, pics, apps, jpg's, exe's, whatever.  And we could include or exclude any file/folder/drive.  When a file was in use (as in the SQL scenario) skip it and tell me it wasn't backed up.

     

    Even VISTA won't allow me to Include Files/Folders or file types.   Why not?

    Why do I have to spend money to buy another backup program that WILL backup everything when I already have 2 programs from MS?

     

    Make it faster.  Make it easier.  Categorize the files in the resultant set by the popular types.  Give me the functionality to "backup all my pictures" to a set.  But DON'T take away functionality - and certainly don't take it away without forcing me to know and agree to it.

     

    Sorry for the rant - but c'mon - change doesn't make it better.

    Wednesday, August 1, 2007 6:37 PM
  • ...so everything I want backed-up is backed up.  (using 1.6) After a manual & forced complete backup, the automatic tune-up process couldn't find the external HD.  That was weird - a 2nd forced full backup went fine, and using the instructions found here, I was able to delete the previous 1.6 set - thank-you very much!

    I am still unable to delete the 2.0 set. Even tried booting to XP but the only way is to go to each individual file, accept ownership, and then delete the file.  Way too much trouble.

    This weekend I'll re-format the drive and start again - and I'll stay on 1.6 with its "Include" functionality.

     

    Thanks for the help!

    PJ

    Thursday, August 2, 2007 12:19 PM
  • Thank *you* for sticking with it and reporting the issue. It generated some good discussion and research and I do hope that it causes some adjustments in the way backup changes from 1.6 to 2.0 so as to *not* lose functionality that we already have and that I believe is valid functionality.

    -steve

     

    Friday, August 3, 2007 3:08 PM
    Moderator