0
Is it better to clone a failing HDD than manually backing it up via copy/paste? (alien.top)
submitted 2 years ago by [B] to c/datahoarder@selfhosted.forum
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

My HDD is failing and manually copying files to an external HDD is taking forever. We're talking about KB/s transfer speeds. I have around 1.3TB in it, but only really need around 400-500gb. I'm afraid this method is only hastening its death.

I used to use a dos program, Norton Ghost, to clone partitions. Would a similar program be better for backing up my files vs copy/pasting? I feel like the manual copying is wearing the drive out faster. On the other hand, cloning might just copy over corrupted files on bad sectors and all (I know nothing about this so I could be wrong).

Thanks in advance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [B] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

I'd stop and ask on r/datarecovery, consider professional recovery. Might be a mechanical issue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S, B] 1 point 2 years ago

    It does seem that way. None of the files are critical enough to warrant spending on a professional.

    Docs are synced with OneDrive, and photos, I probably have copies elsewhere. Real loss will be the audiobooks I've collected over the years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent