> What do experienced users of Entourage 2001 think about using "Typical > rebuild" of database as a way to backup? Let's say I'd run a typical rebuild > every evening or two, and would consider the "old messages", "old database" > etc. files as a backup that I can trust (and more over, that optimises the > DB). Next time I would repeat this, I'd get "old messages 2" etc., and all > I'd need to do is to remove the oldest backups, say every 3-4 days. > > Are there some drawbacks to this, or some risks?
I'm not really sure if the rebuild is potentially risky, but some thoughts-- You'd be backing up the lesser of the two optimized files... If you saved the new messages and database files instead, they'd be smaller. But that kind-of removes the point, which was having the rebuild generate the file you'd be using as a backup. If you're concerned that the rebuild might damage something, then yes, your way is a little safer, but then why take that risk every couple of days? You might not notice any corruption for awhile... I'm betting that copying your MUD folder from the Finder would be a lot faster than going through a rebuild anyway (make sure you quit 'rage and Office Notifications first). - B -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
