Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #112185

Re: jkhv (Sector by Sector Backup)

Show all headers | View raw

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in news:r7on0p$ktv$1@dont-email.me:

> Boris wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Acronis instructions state, "By default Acronis True Image stores only the
>> hard disk sectors that contain data". 
>> 
>> The Acronis Help that I quoted in the OP made me wonder what happens when
>> the sector by sector box is selected, but not the 'unallocated space' box.
>>  Seems to me that the only option needed is something like 'enable backup
>> of unallocated space'. 
>> 
>> On the other hand, Macrium Reflect allows backing up of unallocated space
>> for forensic purposes, and at the same time, offers levels of compression.
>> 
>> https://postimg.cc/yW11tTjD
>> 
>> I'm not concerned about forensics, but guess it's possible with
>> compression. 
>> 
>> Seems the devil's in the details, for those who need to know how each
>> product acts. 
> 
> I tested the Acronis True Image WD Edition, and it's
> all over the road in terms of results.
> 
> There just doesn't seem to be a stable result in what
> it's storing in the TIB file.
> 
> If I was testing that software for home use, I would
> open the window and toss it out on the street :-/
> 
> I evaluated a trial of ATI a few years back, and it
> didn't scare me like this 400MB blob did.

It is large.  I'm sure you're using the same version as I.  It's the 
'latest' 2016: ATI2016_build33.zip, 404MB.

> 
>  From ATI_WD, I got backup sizes of:
> 
>     430KB      (30MB expected)
>     30-40MB    regardless of setting, couldn't get it to capture
>                the entire 4GB disk under any circumstances at first.
> 
> I prepared a second test case, by placing 12 large 160MB files
> on the disk (tiny disk half full), then deleted 11 of them, so
> there would be 11*160 of "unallocated" just-erased files on the disk.
> 
> The two tick boxes "still" ignored my attempt to prepare
> a "model" that I thought the tool might like. It decided
> this time, to back up *the whole damn disk*. Even though so
> far, half of the disk had never been written.

I decided to try something.  My C: drive has three partitions.
OEM, 39MB
Recovery, 13.03GB
OS, 918.44GB

Using the Acronis True Image Western Edition, I imaged the Recovery partition 
three times.  The Recovery partition capacity is 13.03GB, 9.55GB used,  
3.48GB free.

Each image was made under default compression, the differences between images 
being how the Advanced Tab, Image creation mode, was configured.


1) Back up sector-by-sector not enabled
Results, Image 7.36GB, 30 items

2) Back up sector-by-sector enabled
Results, Image 8.17GB, 32 items

3) Back up sector-by sector enabled, Back up unallocated space enabled
Results, 8.21GB, 32 items

I was curious to see what 2 items were missing when not selecting sector-by-
sector, or unallocated space.

Here's a screenshot of the results:

https://postimg.cc/304MQ1Dk

Using Macrium Reflect, I did just one image of the Recovery partition, using 
all default settings.

Results, 7.75GB, 32 items (all the same as with ATIWD.



>-
> I couldn't trust a software which is as capricious as this is.
> Never twice the same.
> 
> The only way I could use it, is to somehow restore it after
> each test, and "see whot I got". That's a hell of a way to
> run an enterprise. We shouldn't have to do that as our
> first step.

That's always been my attitude, whether one trusts the software or not.  My 
images are made to an external USB drive.  I have thought of installing an 
extra internal hard drive, and restoring images to it, to test.  One of these 
days...

Thanks for all your testing.


> 
> This is my test disk for the tests :-) That's
> what I was backing up. Smokin fast. Partitioned NTFS.
> 
> https://i.postimg.cc/7Zb6n9Qh/4-GB-WDC-hdtune.gif
> 
>     Paul

Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10 | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

jkhv Boris <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-04-22 00:29 +0000
  Re: jkhv Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-04-21 21:00 -0400
    Re: jkhv Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2020-04-21 20:14 -0500
      Re: jkhv (Sector by Sector Backup) Boris <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-04-22 03:00 +0000
        Re: jkhv (Sector by Sector Backup) Boris <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-04-22 20:18 +0000
    Re: jkhv (Sector by Sector Backup) Boris <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-04-22 02:30 +0000
      Re: jkhv (Sector by Sector Backup) Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-04-22 02:08 -0400
        Re: jkhv (Sector by Sector Backup) Boris <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-04-23 03:09 +0000
          Re: jkhv (Sector by Sector Backup) Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-04-22 23:34 -0400

csiph-web