Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54
  1. #1
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    TrueImage Survey

    I'd like to hear from a few of you who use TrueImage to backup to a HARD DRIVE concerning the length of time it takes and the number of gigabytes involved. As some of you may remember, my only complaint about the product is the time involved in imaging to a LAN destination. So, I changed my strategy and have begun making my images of two hard drives onto a resident third hard drive. I realize that there are MANY factors involved like the speed of the drive and the CPU but I still wonder. Not only do I have no perspective on how fast is fast (MBs per minute) but it's also difficult to tell exact elapsed times unless I sit here watching the screen from start to finish.

    For example, yesterday I ran a backup of said two drives onto the third drive, starting at 4:35 PM local time. I was watching TV when the backup finished but the last backup file is time stamped at 9:20 PM, almost five hours later! The total data backed up (looking at partition properties) was 23,653 megabytes and I was using high compression. I found the times to not be much different whether I use normal or high compression. I'm wondering if it's taking so long because the two drives have a total of eight partitions or might that be irrelevant.

    Your experiences, please. (For obvious reasons, time involved using CDs is not helpful here)

  2. #2
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Quedgeley, Gloucester, England
    Posts
    5,333
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Al

    Surely you are not backing up two hard drives to a third in parallel?

    How are they connected? From what you say I'm guessing that you have the two source drives on one PC and the other on a second PC.

    Are the two ethernet cards running at 100 Mbps? If not, why not?!

    From the information you give me, ignoring compression, the data rate may be around 23653/285 MB/min = 83 MB/min = 1.38 MB/s = 11 Mbps (B being bytes, and b being bits). So your transfer rate is up to double what you'd expect to get out of a 10 Mbps ethernet LAN. If we take data compression of 1
    <font face="Script MT Bold"><font color=blue><big><big>John</big></big></font color=blue></font face=script>

    Ita, esto, quidcumque...

  3. #3
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Thanks for you thoughts, John. TI runs one partition at a time, beginning with the first and continuing on consecutively through the last one specified.. I don't intend for this to be a "scientific" survey, so I'm not going to worry about cutting the numbers any finer than you did, i.e. 83 MN/min. My problem is that I have no perspective on whether 80-something MBs per minute is good or bad. BTW, what I meant by "resident" is that the three drives are in this machine. The two being backed up are master and slave of the primary IDE chain and the destination drive is the master on the secondary chain. There is no slave on the secondary. (My CD-RW drive is on a separate IDE plugin card.) The kind of info I'm seeking, for example, if someone else is imaging 20 gig in two hours, I know I'm in trouble somewhere. I know that's terribly imprecise, but like I said I'm trying to gain perspective. Hope that clears it up a little...

    Edited to add: In case someone is curious, the drives in my machine are in "modile racks" (trays) and I have three backup drives that I rotate each week. After running my imaging, I shutdown and REMOVE the drive, placing it in a separate area of the house.

  4. #4
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Quedgeley, Gloucester, England
    Posts
    5,333
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Al

    OK, so no LAN.

    Are the source and target drives of the same type and capacity? Do they have any buffering/caching? Are the source drives defragmented (this is where it WOULD have an effect!).

    Do you have any figures for the drive capacity, number of tracks, and rotational speed from which the maximum possible data transfer rate could be calculated?

    I don't think the drive partitioning would have any significant effect whatever!

    John
    <font face="Script MT Bold"><font color=blue><big><big>John</big></big></font color=blue></font face=script>

    Ita, esto, quidcumque...

  5. #5
    Uranium Lounger viking33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    6,308
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Al,
    I usually Image my C & F drives which are both on the same physical drive. The total amount of data is about 17 to 18 gigs for the two. I Image them to a separate D drive used just for backup images.
    I never really timed the total elapsed time ( which I will have to do now from curiosity ) but I don't THINK it was any two hours. As you know I use True Image 8.
    I am due for a monthly full image real soon so I will be more precise in making sure just what the time frame is. I will let you know ASAP.
    BOB
    http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/S/flags/USA.gif http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/S/f...sachusetts.gif


    Long ago, there was a time when men cursed and beat on the ground with sticks. It was called witchcraft.
    Today it is called golf!

  6. #6
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    To John: Yes, I defrag my drives nightly, so I don't think that's the problem. Here's some data on the drive in question. To be honest, in XP I don't remember where to look to make sure that the drive is functioning in Ultra DMA mode.

    Bob: I'll be interested to hear your approximate numbers whenever you do run your next backup.

    I think, just as a comparison test, I'll run a backup image on only my C: drive, approximately 8 gig and see what time it takes.

  7. #7
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    10,550
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    I don't have TrueImage, but I can give you some data for DriveImage

    60GB hard disk with single partition containing 16GByte of data - over my LAN - 90 minutes
    Same 16GByte - to a second hard disk on a different IDE bus - 70 minutes.

    All done with High compression

    StuartR

  8. #8
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Lewiston, Maine, USA
    Posts
    293
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Hi Al,
    I'm using Trueimage 7.0 here and imaging a 14 gig drive to a secondary drive. Time approximately 1 hour 20 minutes w/normal compression and that file occupies approx 10 gig. This is on a PIII 933 mz machine w/384 megs ram.
    I've tried high compression before but the result file wasn't much different than the normal compression file.
    HTH.
    Bob

  9. #9
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Quedgeley, Gloucester, England
    Posts
    5,333
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Al

    Even if it was running at the lower interface speed, 16.6 MB/s is about 15 times faster than the data transfer rate you're getting. What does the Task Manager > Performance window show for the CPU usage whicle the backup is running? It should be fairly low, since data transfers shouldn't be CPU-bound!

    John
    <font face="Script MT Bold"><font color=blue><big><big>John</big></big></font color=blue></font face=script>

    Ita, esto, quidcumque...

  10. #10
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    297
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Big Al,
    I use TrueImage and it saved my butt the other day when I had some problems. I am not that technical but I will try to give you what little I know. I backup from my C: drive to my D: drive using the D: drive for backups only. I just clicked on properties on the last image I made 3 days ago. It says the following: Location D: , Size: 10.6GB (11,387,315,200 bytes) , Size on disk: 10.6GB (11,387,318,272 bytes) , Created: Friday, October 01, 2004, 4:22:27PM , Modified: Friday, October 01, 2004, 4:26:03PM , Accessed: Friday, October 01, 2004, 4:26:03PM. I checked the Log Viewer on TrueImage and it confirms these times. For what it is worth, I am using v8.0 (build764). If you need more info about this, tell me where to find it and I will try to help. Also, I use no compression.

  11. #11
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Even with this small (so far) sampling, I'm glad I asked the question, for there does seem to be something amiss here! The first two from Stuart and Bleduc are about 228 and 175 MB/min. So my 80-something is indicative of something not so hot. I think when I return today I'm going to do a sample run of only my C: partition to a secondary drive, shut off everything in the tray that I can and watch the Task Manager to see what it shows. I have several things running that I never bother to shut down, like firewall, antivirus, clipboard mgr, etc. More later.

  12. #12
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    If you look back in that log, you should see the starting and ending times for the actual partition image creation. Those "minutes" would be helpful along with the size of the partition data, NOT the resulting file. As you can see, I'm interested in calculating MBs per minute on the amount of data backed up. And hey, thanks for helping!

    (I've cropped out all the other entries in the attachment since I was backing up multiple partitions. This view shows only the starting and ending time for the last (small) partition.)
    Attached Images Attached Images

  13. #13
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    84,353
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 29 Times in 29 Posts

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Coinman posted a reply in <post#=413683>post 413683</post#> with a very large graphic. In an attempt to edit it, the reply ended up in a separate thread - sorry.

  14. #14
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    297
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Ok, one last bit of info if it helps at all. You ask,"Your graphic shows that the imaging took only four minutes, but without knowing how much data there was"? I am not a genious at this but maybe this will help. When I click on properties on the C:drive it says there is 11.2GB of used space out of the 120GB drive. I am assuming that the image is the same as I don't use compression and just copy it to the D: drive. Not sure if that helps or makes sense but at least I am trying <img src=/S/hairout.gif border=0 alt=hairout width=31 height=23>

  15. #15
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: TrueImage Survey

    Eureka, I think I found it ! ! 7,131 MB divided by 34 minutes equals 210 MB/minute ! ! (My C: drive, imaged today...)

    Since the "noise level" from TrueImage isn't very high, I think I'll tell you what I did for the possible benefit of someone later. I ran a backup image of my C: drive only, to a DIFFERENT destination drive. Prior to starting, I opened Task Manager and shut down everything I thought I could, except my antivirus program. That list included a program that I think Viking33 mentioned in another thread - TrueImageMonitor.Exe. Personally, I bet I'm gonna find that this <img src=/w3timages/censored.gif alt=censored border=0> program was the speed degradation culprit, but that does remain to be seen. Given the result above, one would have to conclude that my speed problem was caused either by the drive speed itself, the imaging of multiple partitions, or one of the TSRs that I shut down. I'm betting on the last one and I'm gonna do another test later tonite and close ONLY the Acronis monitoring program to see what happens.

    By the way, it's also interesting to note that the TrueImage program itself tells you that the destination image file will be limited in size to 4 gig because of FAT32 and my images HAVE always been a succession of 4 gig files. However, today's test although a FAT32 partition, backed up to a FAT32 formatted drive, resulted on ONE file of 3,679 MB in size at normal compression. Enuf... More later... And thanks to all my "helpers" so far.

    Edited to add screenshot of what I THINK is the "offending" program.
    Attached Images Attached Images

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •