FDISR - Export/Import

[ErikAlbert]

Today, I exported Snapshot-03 in pieces of 650mb (=665600kb) to Snapshot-03ES and FDISR created 5 files


1. Snapshot-03ES.arx = 665,600kb
2. Snapshot-03ES.001 = 665,600kb
3. Snapshot-03ES.002 = 665,600kb
4. Snapshot-03ES.003 = 665,600kb
5. Snapshot-03ES.004 = 210,750kb
--------------------------------
Total............... 2,873,150kb, which seems to be correct in size.

I assume that all these files need to be burn on CD's?
I didn't burn them on CD's, that must be a very time-consuming job. Pffft

But I imported the file Snapshot-03ES.arx back into a new Snapshot-04 and after rebooting, Snapshot-04 seems to be OK and complete.

The file Snapshot-03ES.arx seems to be the leader during the import and is probably the first CD in your CD/DVD-drive and then probably Snapshot-03ES.001, .002, .003 and .004.
I didn't really test this, but it's logical that it has to be done this way.

I also did it without splitting and that results in ONE file Snapshot03ES.arx

Since the extension .arx is the same as for "Archived Snapshot", you can use the import function also for "Archived Snapshots", which I've tested also with no problems whatsoever.
Exported Snapshots (.arx) however don't appear together with "Archived Snapshot" in the main menu of FDISR.

Personally, I will never use this, but I guess it will work for users, that love CD's as a backup medium.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> Exported Snapshots (.arx) however don't appear together with "Archived Snapshot" in the main menu of FDISR. <-QUOTE}
Does the exported .arx show in the archives list when you move it to the archive location?
(Refresh the archive list with F5)

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Does the exported .arx show in the archives list when you move it to the archive location?
(Refresh the archive list with F5) <-QUOTE}
You got that right.
My mistake, because I changed the archive folder in the settings for another test and I forgot to change it back.
All arx-files are visible now, also the exported ones, but not the .001 upto .004-files and that's good because that would be confusing. :)

[Peter2150]

Another excellent and interesting test. Not practical for CD's but for DVD's why not. I agree though and stick with external HD's

Pete

[sukarof]

{QUOTE-> I assume that all these files need to be burn on CD's?
I didn't burn them on CD's, that must be a very time-consuming job. Pffft
<-QUOTE}

Not really, personally I dont burn CD´s anymore (does anyone burn backups on CD´s still? :) ), but surely it wouldnt take more than 2-3 minutes/CD with a relatively new burner? Then again, what is time consuming is a relative matter :)
I have burnt FDSIRarchives to DVD-R and DVD-RW and imported them back without any problems.

[ErikAlbert]

In order to satisfy, the very disappointed member "sukarof", I burned all 5 CD-RW's for real
at the incredible writing speed of 4x (600kb/s - 23m/CD), while I was re-watching the movie "Terminator III" to kill the waiting time.
Meanwhile my wife was lying in bed with tapping fingers, waiting for me and couldn't understand why I wasn't satisfying her instead of male member "sukarof".

1. The burning and verification process was successfull, at least on the outside and lasted 100 minutes machine-time. (NOT including my manual actions).

2. The import of 5 CD-RW's to create the new Snapshot-05 took 39 minutes (NOT included my manual actions)
FDISR asked me nicely to insert the next CD in the expected sequence .arx, .001, .002, .003 and .004

3. Then I rebooted with Snapshot-05 to report all this at Wilders and everything was working fine in Snapshot-05.
So everything has been tested concering export/import. :)

P.S.: the reason why I used CD's was because I don't have DVD's yet.

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> ...Meanwhile my wife was lying in bed with tapping fingers, waiting for me and couldn't understand why I wasn't satisfying her instead of male member "sukarof".... <-QUOTE}:o Wow ! It's rare to see that much info around here !;D

Well, I couldn't resist and I'm in the middle of burning an FD-ISR archive of my laptop's primary snapshot to a DVD+R Double Layer right now, at about 4X. The file is 8,521,020,598 bytes and it looks like it will take around 30 minutes to burn.

Followup to restore and test boot this archive will have to wait 'til tomorrow.

However, it will have to be in daylight hours, since I will be flying home to Pennsylvania in the evening and I don't think I want to have anyone finding out my wife spent tomorrow night tapping her fingers !:P

ETA: Confirming, it took 30 minutes to burn the arx file and 30 more minutes to verify it. This morning, I restored the arx from the DVD, copied it into my secondary snapshot and booted successfully into it with everything operating nominally. IMO, it's comforting to just put away a "permanently" burned snapshot once in a while -- granted this is only the OS, programs, and system/program customizations with my data on a separate partition.

[aigle]

Hi ErikAlbert! in that case if one uses an external HD instead of CD/ DVD, then I think he should not need ATI to cover a hardware disater.
What u think?

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Hi ErikAlbert! in that case if one uses an external HD instead of CD/ DVD, then I think he should not need ATI to cover a hardware disater.
What u think? <-QUOTE}
Personally, I don't mix image backup and immediate system recovery. I see both separately, which means I will never ditch ATI for FDISR.

If you have everything on ONE partition, usually [C:], than I think you can use FDISR as a replacement for ATI and the maximum of 10 snapshots isn't a problem, because you can have as many ARCHIVED snapshots (.arx) as you want.

If you have more than one partition, for example : system partition [C:] and data partition [D:], then you have a problem IMHO, because FDISR works only for your system partition [C:] and you won't have a backup method for your data partition [D:].
I prefer to have at least two partitions and some members have even more than two according my readings, member "Mrkvonic" is certainly one of them.

You can wait for other replies, but that is how I see it and I won't change my mind anymore, because I'm alot more happy with two partitions, than one partition. It simplifies alot and I don't have to worry about my personal files anymore and I can do whatever I want with my system partition. :)

[Peter2150]

Erik

I agree with you. I use two external drives for redundancy, and use several imaging progams to get a baseline image to restore. Just that it doesn't matter is if gets old. Then FDISR archives to get current. I also wouldn't abandon the traditonal imaging.

Pete

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Erik

I agree with you. I use two external drives for redundancy, and use several imaging progams to get a baseline image to restore. Just that it doesn't matter is if gets old. Then FDISR archives to get current. I also wouldn't abandon the traditonal imaging.

Pete <-QUOTE}
Peter,
Suppose you have only FDISR on your computer and you backup your snapshots on an external harddisk (.arx).
One day your harddisk crashes and you buy another harddisk.
Don't you have to re-install Windows and FDISR manually in order to get your snapshots back?
I'm asking this because "aigle" thinks, he can work with FDISR alone, even in case of the worst scenario.
IMO it depends on how you see it of course. If you have to install Windows and FDISR manually, that's not what I call image restore. What do you think?

[tobacco]

ErikAlbert

aigle is correct in his thinking.With snapshots backed up to an external source and important data if they are separated with a different partition on his primary drive, recovery is as simple as installing windows and FD ISR again.Then creating a secondary snapshot and using it to bring the system back up to speed.Obviously, the prefered method by you and others is faster to get to this end result.And having 2 backups ( image and archives ) leaves some room for error instead of having only one.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> ErikAlbert

aigle is correct in his thinking.With snapshots backed up to an external source and important data if they are separated with a different partition on his primary drive, recovery is as simple as installing windows and FD ISR again.Then creating a secondary snapshot and using it to bring the system back up to speed.Obviously, the prefered method by you and others is faster to get to this end result.And having 2 backups ( image and archives ) leaves some room for error instead of having only one. <-QUOTE}
In that case I wish "aigle" good luck. :)

[aigle]

Ya, all I mean if somebody wants to cover two thing by one, especially if one is not doing backups frquently then there is at least a single choice there.

[crofttk]

Yep, it's just a big disconnect on the differences and definitions of "need" and "want", i.e., semantics.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Peter,
Suppose you have only FDISR on your computer and you backup your snapshots on an external harddisk (.arx).
One day your harddisk crashes and you buy another harddisk.
Don't you have to re-install Windows and FDISR manually in order to get your snapshots back?
I'm asking this because "aigle" thinks, he can work with FDISR alone, even in case of the worst scenario.
IMO it depends on how you see it of course. If you have to install Windows and FDISR manually, that's not what I call image restore. What do you think? <-QUOTE}

Absolutely. I'd have to install some flavor of XP, then install my external drive drivers, then install FDISR, and then could get the archives. Acronis or any image is faster.

Technically Aigle is correct you could do that, but to me it doesn't make sense.

Pete

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Ya, all I mean if somebody wants to cover two thing by one, especially if one is not doing backups frquently then there is at least a single choice there. <-QUOTE}

Aigle

It's true what you say, but FDISR support technically doesn't support use of FDISR for that purpose. Other than that it depends on your time. If time isn't an issue, yes what you suggest is viable, but for me time is an issue, so getting an image recovered and then updating with FDISR is preferable.

I've also learned that in the long run simple is better. To me in this case that equates to Image + FDISR

Pete

[ErikAlbert]

Hey guys,

If you work with system and data partition and you use only FDISR, how are you going to backup your data partition [D:] ?

[dallen]

Not to contradict your conclusion Peter2150 & ErikAlbert, because I agree with you both. However, I want to point out this option:

OS Recovery from Hard Drive Failure (http://www.leapfrogsoftware.com/support_info/application_notes/pdfs/AppNote-OSRecoveryFromHardDriveFailure.pdf)

Of course this does not address the issue regarding backing up your data when the data is stored on a separate partition than they OS. However, I do feel that the method discussed in the above article warrants recognition.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> If you work with system and data partition and you use only FDISR, how are you going to backup your data partition [D:] ? <-QUOTE}
Focusing on data backup: maybe it doesn't matter if you anchor data or store it on a data partition.
The advantage of a separate data partition is easy recovery of the system partition with some disk image.

I use syncbackup (http://www.2brightsparks.com/products.html) to synchronize two pc's in a home network and to backup to a external harddisk.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Not to contradict your conclusion Peter2150 & ErikAlbert, because I agree with you both. However, I want to point out this option:

OS Recovery from Hard Drive Failure (http://www.leapfrogsoftware.com/support_info/application_notes/pdfs/AppNote-OSRecoveryFromHardDriveFailure.pdf)

Of course this does not address the issue regarding backing up your data when the data is stored on a separate partition than they OS. However, I do feel that the method discussed in the above article warrants recognition. <-QUOTE}
Well this method requires GHOST, which is also an image backup software.
So it isn't a PURE FirstDefense solution, because GHOST is involved.

I still wonder how you will backup your DATA partition [D:], if you ONLY use FDISR as system restore and as backup solution.
I would like to have an answer.

[tobacco]

I've never used an additional drive but do plan to get one someday.Anyways, maybe i'm a newbie to external drives but couldn't you just copy important data over the same way you do from partition to partition or networked computers?.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Hey guys,

If you work with system and data partition and you use only FDISR, how are you going to backup your data partition [D:] ? <-QUOTE}

One of the reason's I don't partition.:)

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> I've never used an additional drive but do plan to get one someday.Anyways, maybe i'm a newbie to external drives but couldn't you just copy important data over the same way you do from partition to partition or networked computers?. <-QUOTE}
There is ALWAYS a solution, but some solutions are faster, easier, safer, ... than other solutions.
I don't really need a computer, if I use paper and pencil, but things will go slower without computer.

Users have always copy/paste files on computers from the beginning : on tapes, on floppies, on CD's, on DVD's and on harddisks.
Copy/paste files isn't the same as an image backup. Image backup is a total solution without manual mistakes, can be scheduled and can be done automatically.
Copy/paste is a manual action done by the user and users make mistakes sooner or later.

[Peter2150]

Dallen

I looked at that article of Todd's, and recognize it as a solution. Just not one I am confortable with. I'd rather pop an Ancronis,IFD or whatever cd in boot it, restore the image to a new drive, then refresh snapshot with FDISR. Simplicity. When (I) have start messing with Lite versions of XP, scripts and whatever, I see opportunity for (me) to mess it up.

As for the D: partition. This is why again I don't partition. I hear all the reasons for partitioning, but I haven't done it, and in 5 years haven't had a problem or lost any data where partitioning would have made a difference. This way one disk image, one FDISR refresh. Simple way for simple me.;D

Pete

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> Hey guys,

If you work with system and data partition and you use only FDISR, how are you going to backup your data partition [D:] ? <-QUOTE}At Peter2150's suggestion, I've been using AJC Active Backup to not only backup but simultaneously archive a number of revisions of files on my Documents Drive.

Furthermore, I use periodic imaging and nightly file-based backup of my Documents Drive. Since my Documents Drive isn't covered by FDISR and can't be "reinstalled" like an OS and programs partition, I obviously back it up and image it more frequently and redundantly than my system partition.

Well, also I have the My Documents folder along with Favorites, Outlook+OE data files, and current purchased software install files and licensing information replicated across all 4 of our desktops and my laptop.

Obviously, that's more than most people would do but it offers alternatives.

[ErikAlbert]

I still don't have a clear answer to my question.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> I still don't have a clear answer to my question. <-QUOTE}
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=763635&postcount=20

[ErikAlbert]

IMO the right answer is :
If you have only FDISR and two partitions (or more) : system [C:] and data [D:], you don't have a backup
for your data partition [D:], because FDISR works only on your system partition [C:], which means you have only a backup of your system partition [C:] by archiving snapshots on CD/DVD's or an external harddisk.
But you don't have a real backup solution for your data partition [D:] and FDISR won't help you in this case.
I'm talking about a minimum situation here, like member "aigle" suggested.

That's why I keep on saying, that FDISR isn't a replacement for image backup, you need both.

Using more than one backup software, is a matter of belts and braces.
If I use two backup softwares, I'm better of than one who uses only one.
If I use three backup softwares, I'm better of than one who uses only one or two.
But this has nothing to do with backup anymore, that's a personal choice. I only need ATI for both partitions. That's the same as using 1 scanner or 10 scanners.

[sukarof]

{QUOTE-> In order to satisfy, the very disappointed member "sukarof", I burned all 5 CD-RW's for real
at the incredible writing speed of 4x (600kb/s - 23m/CD), while I was re-watching the movie "Terminator III" to kill the waiting time.
Meanwhile my wife was lying in bed with tapping fingers, waiting for me and couldn't understand why I wasn't satisfying her instead of male member "sukarof" <-QUOTE}

hmm.."ericalbert" did I offend you some way? If so I am sorry, that was not my intention.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> hmm.."ericalbert" did I offend you some way? If so I am sorry, that was not my intention. <-QUOTE}
LOL In no way, that post was a combination of "just kidding" and a serious test.
I don't like half work, so I tried it for real.

[wilbertnl]

Your answer is right for you, EricAlbert. :thumb:

When I think about data backup, I think of a solution where I'm able to retrieve one single file out the the backup solution I use. If needed even several versions of one single file.
I know that ATI 9.x is able to handle one file retrieval, but when you talk about disk imaging software, you usually handle whole partitions or whole disks. That's great for system restore, but not for backup of documents.
I don't consider your option of imaging your data partition a data backup in that sense, I consider that a solution for system restore.

It's fine with me if you feel like you need three or more simultaneous solutions for images and backups.
My world won't fall apart when my data gets lost. :)

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> It's fine with me if you feel like you need three or more simultaneous solutions for images and backups.
My world won't fall apart when my data gets lost. :) <-QUOTE}
As I said, I use ATI only for both partitions.
Peter is the one who likes more than one backup system : ATI and IFW/IFD and Ghost and AJC. In other words : a layered backup LOL.
I will never go that far, ATI is more than enough for me.

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> If you work with system and data partition and you use only FDISR, how are you going to backup your data partition [D:] ? <-QUOTE}{QUOTE-> I still don't have a clear answer to my question. <-QUOTE}OK, I guess a more direct answer to the question as asked literally would be: You aren't going to back up ANYTHING because, if you use ONLY FDISR, then by definition you have no backup program to use.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> OK, I guess a more direct answer to the question as asked literally would be: You aren't going to back up ANYTHING because, if you use ONLY FDISR, then by definition you have no backup program to use. <-QUOTE}

Maybe maybe not. This is a semantics question.

From Wikipidia

From Wikipidia

Noun

(computing) A copy of a file or record, stored separately from the original, that can be used to recover the original if it is destroyed or damaged.
After the power failure, we had to restore the database from backup.

So is FDISR a backup. In the strictest sense no, but still you could consider it a backup.

On the other comment of Erik's I don't use layering cause I really want to. My PC is mission critical, which is why I'd never do some of the stuff I do, if I didn't have such confidence in FDISR. I've imaged, verified the images, and extracted files from the images. Experts in the various pieces of software tell me I can be 98% confident in those images. But to be 100% confident I'd have to do what Erik and Dallen have done. Problem is nothing is for sure, and restoring and image and having the restore fail is a risk I can't afford. So by imaging with 3 different imaging programs, I am just playing the odd's that one of them will work. Still have the fall back of installing windows and FDISR. But that isn't as clean as an image with FDISR already there. On my next system to be sure I will do the stuff Erik and Dallen are doing first.

Pete

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> Maybe maybe not. This is a semantics question.... <-QUOTE}You're preaching to the choir from where I sit.

I was specifically catering to Erik's insistence that FDISR is not a backup program and his apparent dissatisfaction with answers some of us posted explaining how we do or would back up our data when it's on a separate partition (not restricting ourselves to the use of only FDISR, violating the literal sense of his question).

If I start from the strict premise that FDISR is NOT a backup program AND I use NO OTHER SOFTWARE, then I can't back up anything, can I ?

I was trying to bring to light that an overly restrictive question can result in an overly restrictive answer. If dialogue has to remain that rigid, I'll just pass, thank you.

[dallen]

{QUOTE-> IMO the right answer is :
If you have only FDISR and two partitions (or more) : system [C:] and data [D:], you don't have a backup
for your data partition [D:], because FDISR works only on your system partition [C:], which means you have only a backup of your system partition [C:] by archiving snapshots on CD/DVD's or an external harddisk.
But you don't have a real backup solution for your data partition [D:] and FDISR won't help you in this case.
I'm talking about a minimum situation here, like member "aigle" suggested.

That's why I keep on saying, that FDISR isn't a replacement for image backup, you need both. <-QUOTE}
ErikAlbert,
I know that others have questioned your insistence on using multiple partitions, but let me do it one more time. Why do you insist on partitioning your hard drives?

The reason I ask is not to patronize you, but rather to inquire about using the following method:

Use FDISR with data anchoring for your important data. Use an external HD to export your snapshots and store a backup copy of your important data. This method would require two simultaneous HD failures for you to be screwed. My guess is that this method does not provide for a quick way to restore your system in the event of a HD failure due to the fact that you would have to reinstall Windows and update it. Just wanted to pose the option. Personally I use Image for Windows for that purpose and I understand that you prefer ATI. Since you use ATI, it is probably easier for you to simply image all of your partitions for backup purposes.

Despite your preference for ATI, I still think that you could benefit by using FDISR. For example, when I decide to experiment with a software, I can be fearless because a simple reboot restores my system to the exact way that it was before I installed the experimental software. Using an imaging program could accomplish the same thing, but it would take considerably more time and thus would tend to dissuade one from engaging in such experiment.

Sorry to ramble, but I wanted to present you with my thoughts as they came to mind.

Peter2150,
I agree with your assessment of the article I posted. Actually, I came to a similar conclusion for the same reasons long ago. I simply wanted the option to be known.

[ErikAlbert]

ATI and IFW are just software names for me, I never work with names, I work with what these softwares DO.
As long ATI doesn't fail and it never did, I have no reasons to change.
I've tested ATI thoroughly, because I didn't trust ATI after reading all these serious troubles with ATI in the Acronis Forums at Wilders. I just wanted to know for myself, if ATI was really a troublemaker or not.
I'm not in love with ATI, I'm in love with what ATI "does" and IFW "does" exactly the same job.
"Love" is too strong for me, because I don't love any software, I just like them if they do their job properly, but English isn't my first language and I can't find a better word.

I already bought FDISR, because it's an interesting software with lots of possibilities and it has something very special, that ATI and IFW don't have : refreshing snapshots. I can't refresh ATI/IFW-images.
ShadowUser/Deepfreeze can't do this either and what both softwares can is also possible in FDISR, when I freeze my active snapshot. That's why I ditched both softwares without even trying them.

For me, it was FDISR or RollbackRx and since RollbackRx isn't as reliable as FDISR, my choice was again easy.
I don't need 30,000 snapshots either and I can create more than 30,000 "Archived Snapshots" with FDISR also, if that would be necessary. So where is the advantage of RollbackRx? Saving space? No, because I can save space by storing Archived snapshots on an external harddisk.
I don't need that many snapshots either and 10 snapshots is more than enough for me.

Concerning separating system from data, I'm 100% convinced that this is the right approach.
I've have worked all my life with ONE partition [C:], just like Peter.
So I know how it is to work with ONE partition and more than ONE partition and I won't change my mind about this anymore.
Peter doesn't know how easy it is to work with TWO partitions, because he never did it in practice, just like I didn't know how easy it is to work with FDISR, because I never used it.
Peter doesn't have to listen to me, he is already satisfied with his way of working.
It's very obvious for me that system and data need a different approach and this isn't the right forum to discuss this separation.

I'm an analyst and I like to think about these things and I learned how to separate problems from one another that have nothing to do with eachother. I also learned how to solve difficult problems by dividing them in smaller problems and to find a solution for each of these smaller problems in order to solve a difficult problem.
I have only one big disadvantage at Wilders, I don't know anything about internet, security and even computers and that's why I make alot of mistakes and when I don't know anything about something, I use my intuition to make the right decisions.
At work, I don't have that problem, because I know almost everything about my applications, but these applications have nothing to do with internet and security.

[silver0066]

I use ATI and FD-ISR. I have my system and programs on the C: partition and my data on the D: partition. I only backup the C: partition with ATI. I anchor my Desktop and My Favorites with FD-ISR.

There is a program called Second Copy which automatically backs up my data to the external drive everyday in the background, or on any schedule I want. It does it incrementally only as items change. You can keep as many changes as you want. Check it out.
www.secondcopy.com (http://www.secondcopy.com)

[dallen]

ErikAlbert,
Please keep in mind that I am not trying to change your mind. The way you manage your system and your data is your business. I was simply wanting to present an alternative for you to consider. It is obvious that you are smart enough to make you own decisions and frankly I do not have a vested interest in the way your manage your system.

Just as you've opened my mind to ATI, a program that I had previously ruled out as being unreliable and overly complicated, I would like to open yours to the posibility of accomplishing your goals without multiple partitions.

Once again, please don't receive this posting as a criticism or anything close. It is merely intended to invoke your consideration of an alternative.

[Peter2150]

I do very well understand the advantages to multiple partitions, but there is one big factor that makes a single partition advantageous. FDISR.

I normally run two FDISR snapshots, with My Documents data anchored. Since MS Office is a key component to my business, I am very interested in the New MS Office 2007 Beta. But it messes with your data etc etc. Also I want to test how it interacts with everything else on my system. Also it has you install stuff for feedback, and a new indexing system for the system, that is required for parts of the new office. A whole lot of things going on that I just want to keep totally isolated

So what I did is remove data anchoring, and create a third snapshot where I installed the beta and all the other stuff also. I also keep an archive of this snapshot, so if I add something that messes it up I can restore it back This way I can run the thru the paces, and not worry about what happens to any data, because it is isolated in the snapshot.

Unless I am missing something this would be more difficult if I partitioned.

But again it still comes down to what suites the individual.

Unpartitioned;D Pete

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> You aren't going to back up ANYTHING because, if you use ONLY FDISR, then by definition you have no backup program to use. <-QUOTE}
Well, I don't think that FD-ISR manages other partitions than C:, and I get the feeling that this is ErikAlbert's concern.
He specifically discusses a separate data partition.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> My PC is mission critical...
Problem is nothing is for sure <-QUOTE}
Hello Peter,

If I had a mission critical system, I would consider mirroring as solution of preference. Which would mean duplicate hardware.
I would definitely insist on testing the recovery plan from scratch.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> refreshing snapshots. I can't refresh ATI/IFW-images. <-QUOTE}
Yes, you can, ErikAlbert, and actually you can update an ATI image incrementally, which feature I miss in FD-ISR.

http://www.geocities.com/wilbertnl/images/acronis-2.jpg

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Hello Peter,

If I had a mission critical system, I would consider mirroring as solution of preference. Which would mean duplicate hardware.
I would definitely insist on testing the recovery plan from scratch. <-QUOTE}

Actually I do mirror in a sort of way. I have a desktop replacement laptop that actually exceeds my desktop in power. All business related software is on it and I can do a 2 minute data refresh and be working on my laptop. Do it all the time as a matter of course. So in that sense I am mirrored. Even if I don't switch machines, I keep the little drive I use to swap the data constantly refreshed so I can go either way in a heart beat.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Well, I don't think that FD-ISR manages other partitions than C:, and I get the feeling that this is ErikAlbert's concern.
He specifically discusses a separate data partition. <-QUOTE}
That was indeed my concern. As long you keep everything on one partition [C:], you won't have a problem with FDISR.
My question was a hypothetical one : what will happen if you have two partitions and you have only FDISR as sort of backup?
It all started with "aigle" suggestion and it's worth to talk about it.

My concern is that there are two groups of people discussing FDISR : one-partition-people and more-partition-people
and they look at FDISR in a different way and they answer differently and offer different solutions.
Why would I anchor my data for instance, there is nothing to anchor anymore on partition [C:], because my data is on partition [D:] and this is just one example of these differences. The same with "aigle"'s suggestion, because FDISR can't be used as sort of backup, when you have more than one partition.

{QUOTE-> Yes, you can, ErikAlbert, and actually you can update an ATI image incrementally, which feature I miss in FD-ISR. <-QUOTE}
Well you got me there wilbernl. Frankly I never saw that window, maybe this window appears, when you choose
incremental backups instead of full backup, which I never tried. I will check it out. Thanks :)

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE->
Well you got me there wilbernl. Frankly I never saw that window, maybe this window appears, when you choose
incremental backups instead of full backup, which I never tried. I will check it out. Thanks :) <-QUOTE}

Incremental images turn out to be a mixed blessing. I gave up on them because I didn't see any point. 1) They took just as long to do, and 2) They ended up being just as big as the original(because if the file is moved it will be reimaged. 3) I suspect many of the problems people have with ATI is trying to get to complicated, even though Acronis claims things things can be done. Just doing a complete disk image keeps it simple.

Erik another test for you. Try the incrementals and see. Throw some defrags in as thats what can cause the incrementals to grow.

[wilbertnl]

What I understand of FD-ISR is that it's developed with fast system recovery in mind, and the way it does that is with software mirroring. It's called snapshots. Fast system recovery, because the involved system had to pickup the processing of a flow of data as soon as possible. This was focused on handling dynamic data, not static data, the data wasn't on disk.

In case of one partition:
When you don't anchor at all and develop a consistent copy/update schedule to a second disk, you would have a backup solution.
Acadia is using FD-ISR this way, if I understand his information correctly.

In case of anchored data or a separate data partition:
You still need a procedure to backup your data. There are many ways to do that.

{QUOTE-> I still don't have a clear answer to my question.
<-QUOTE}
I think that you got a couple valid answers from this forum. But maybe you didn't get the answer that you were hoping for?

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> 1) They took just as long to do, and 2) They ended up being just as big as the original (because if the file is moved it will be reimaged. <-QUOTE}
Peter,

Here is what I experienced with ATI:
When you restore a partition from an image, the result is not sectorwise equal to the original, it may be shifted one or two sectors. With consequence that ATI recognizes a change of almost all sectors when it compares with the images in order to decide the increment.
So, what I did was: restore from image, then first create a full image and only after that update/change the 'snapshot'. Only then an ATI incremental update is significant smaller! Sometimes a couple MB.

What I would like to see is that I create a 'mother image', let's call that OEM-installation.
Then I update the 'snapshot' to my liking and only the differences are stored in the incremental update (call it complete).
But then I would like to restore the OEM-installation and update it in a different way, for example prepared for testing purpose.
I would like to be able to make a different incremental update which I then call beta test.

So, the picture would look like this:

OEM-installation (1.2 GB)
|___ complete (0.7 GB)
|___ beta test (0.3 GB)

In this situation I would have 3 options to restore from and it would take 2.2 GB.

What do you think?

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> I think that you got a couple valid answers from this forum. But maybe you didn't get the answer that you were hoping for? <-QUOTE}
I only wanted a confirmation of my own answer, that FDISR can't be used as a sort of backup solution for data partition [D:], but that answer is already given in another post. So I got my confirmation.
The only answers I got upto now, were solutions, I didn't ask for solutions, I asked for a confirmation, if I was right or wrong.

This is the answer to my question and confirms that I was right.
{QUOTE->
Well, I don't think that FD-ISR manages other partitions than C:, and I get the feeling that this is ErikAlbert's concern.
<-QUOTE}

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Peter,

Here is what I experienced with ATI:
When you restore a partition from an image, the result is not sectorwise equal to the original, it may be shifted one or two sectors. With consequence that ATI recognizes a change of almost all sectors when it compares with the images in order to decide the increment.
So, what I did was: restore from image, then first create a full image and only after that update/change the 'snapshot'. Only then an ATI incremental update is significant smaller! Sometimes a couple MB.

What I would like to see is that I create a 'mother image', let's call that OEM-installation.
Then I update the 'snapshot' to my liking and only the differences are stored in the incremental update (call it complete).
But then I would like to restore the OEM-installation and update it in a different way, for example prepared for testing purpose.
I would like to be able to make a different incremental update which I then call beta test.

So, the picture would look like this:

OEM-installation (1.2 GB)
|___ complete (0.7 GB)
|___ beta test (0.3 GB)

In this situation I would have 3 options to restore from and it would take 2.2 GB.

What do you think? <-QUOTE}

Hi Wilbertnl

What I was talking about is simply take a full image today. Then just use your system a week, do a defrag or two, and then take an incremental image. That incremental can be almost as big as the original. Also the time can be just as long. It's because ATI takes the image based on moved sectors. Based on that I just only take full images when ever I image.

Pete

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> What I was talking about is simply take a full image today. Then just use your system a week, do a defrag or two, and then take an incremental image. <-QUOTE}
I understand that, Peter,
The incremental update would be significant smaller if you omit the defrag of the partition.

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> Well, I don't think that FD-ISR manages other partitions than C:, and I get the feeling that this is ErikAlbert's concern.
He specifically discusses a separate data partition. <-QUOTE}Understood, wilbertnl. I don't know why it keeps getting repeated that FDISR doesn't service other partitions, that's like FDISR 101 and I think most of us in these conversations are operating at the 300 level at least. It's beating a dead horse.

At the first mention of a separate partition, all further involvement of FDISR in the conversation is moot.

I would have never moved my data to a separate partition if I had no other software than FDISR.

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> I understand that, Peter,
The incremental update would be significant smaller if you omit the defrag of the partition. <-QUOTE}Right, and that basic problem stems from the fact that one is using a sector based imaging program to do an incremental backup which, is actually, more suited to a file based backup program (such as Retrospect).

ATI can do file based (files and folders backup versus disk image) backup and I believe folks should stick to that if they want to go the route of using ATI to create a baseline full backup and then follow with periodic incremental or differential backups. Unfortunately I haven't had such good luck using ATI to do file based backups -- it simply isn't reliable enough for me to use it that way. The current build IS reliable enough on my system to take images with, however, and I AM using it for that.

Acronis tries to make ATI a do everything program and it's unforunate that it complicates things enough that Acronis is having quality control problems with it (although there probably are some other contributing factors).

Programs that do one thing well are where I tend to get the most value for my systems -- if it's a little geeky, it doesn't bother me -- I don't mind RTFMing to get a handle on things.

[wilbertnl]

{QUOTE-> Programs that do one thing well are where I tend to get the most value for my systems <-QUOTE}
I didn't feel that I needed the features of ATI 9, so I never updated and stuck with ATI 8.
But since I installed FD-ISR I have not used imaging software at all.

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> ...But since I installed FD-ISR I have not used imaging software at all. <-QUOTE}Understood. But if you ever decide you want more security or redundancy, ATI is still there.

Even though there are those who think it's silly, I do "layer" my backup protection because I have been burnt and none of those critics are gonna be around to recover my data if it happens again.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Understood. But if you ever decide you want more security or redundancy, ATI is still there.

Even though there are those who think it's silly, I do "layer" my backup protection because I have been burnt and none of those critics are gonna be around to recover my data if it happens again. <-QUOTE}

Amen to that.:thumb:

[ErikAlbert]

Well guys, FDISR saved me today. Something went wrong in my Snapshot-02 after installing the legitimate software "F-Secure Internet Security" (FIS).
"FIS" doesn't seem to like any other security software and that caused problems in rebooting. I was stucked in a reboot loop.
ATI would have saved me by restoring an image, but FDISR allowed me to reboot in Snapshot-01 and remove Snapshot-02 in a much faster way.
Meanwhile I installed FIS properly in Snapshot-02 without having reboot problems, but it still doesn't work because I still can't access any website, but that is a different problem. :)

[Acadia]

That's what FD-ISR is all about, Immediate System Recovery! :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

Acadia

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> That's what FD-ISR is all about, Immediate System Recovery! :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

Acadia <-QUOTE}
Right you are. Meanwhile my problem with F-secure is fixed. I have access to any website. :)

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Right you are. Meanwhile my problem with F-secure is fixed. I have access to any website. :) <-QUOTE}

Welcome to the "We really love FDISR" fan club. It helped me with F-Secure also. I never did get it installed.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Welcome to the "We really love FDISR" fan club. It helped me with F-Secure also. I never did get it installed. <-QUOTE}
As I said before "love" is too big for me, I "like" software.
I can imagine your troubles with F-Secure, I had to uninstall ZoneAlarm Free, AVG Free, Ad-Aware Free and Spybot S&D completely before I could install F-Secure. I tried it without uninstalling them and that's why I got in trouble.
My system kept on rebooting and Windows wasn't even loaded. I got a Blue Screen with alot of text instead, that disappeared so quickly I couldn't even read it.
I was lucky I got the FDISR preboot screen to boot in another snapshot or I was still rebooting.
Of course the ATI Rescue CD would have saved me too, but certainly not that FAST. ;D

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> As I said before "love" is too big for me, I "like" software.
I can imagine your troubles with F-Secure, I had to uninstall ZoneAlarm Free, AVG Free, Ad-Aware Free and Spybot S&D completely before I could install F-Secure. I tried it without uninstalling them and that's why I got in trouble.
My system kept on rebooting and Windows wasn't even loaded. I got a Blue Screen with alot of text instead, that disappeared so quickly I couldn't even read it.
I was lucky I got the FDISR preboot screen to boot in another snapshot or I was still rebooting.
Of course the ATI Rescue CD would have saved me too, but certainly not that FAST. ;D <-QUOTE}

I was just trying to install the darn AV. Shouldn't have to strip machine for that. F-Secure AV can't be that good.

[dallen]

Just for the record, I currently have NOD32 on one snapshot, BitDefender on another, and F-Secure's Internet Security 2006 on a third. I am doing this for trial purposes and all three are working. I say working and we all know that is a relative term when used in the context of software.

The only one of the three that I do not really like is NOD32. I know it's a popular program in these forums, but it literally gives me hundreds of errors every time I scan. These errors are mostly related to FDISR files, which you cannot easily exclude.

Actually, Pete, it's a shame that you cannot get F-Secure installed because it is actually a nice program.

ErikAlbert,
I know what you mean when you say that "love" is too big a word to use with software and that you only "like" First Defense. Even taking that into consideration, I LOVE First Defense ISR. I mean, I would make sweet love down by the fire kinda love.;) Yes, First Defense is that good of a software.

[Leapfrog Software]

Dallen,

Your comment, "I mean, I would make sweet love down by the fire kinda love. Yes, First Defense is that good of a software." just got an enormous chuckle out of me. You just made my day.

[Peter2150]

ROFLMAO. Yep it is that good. Erik just wait until something trashes you and you realize oops no recent image.

[Leapfrog Software]

Holy smokes, I just can't stop giggling about your comment. Good stuff! I went ahead and shared it with the rest of the Engineering team. I got the whole department ROFL-ing.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> ROFLMAO. Yep it is that good. Erik just wait until something trashes you and you realize oops no recent image. <-QUOTE}
What if your source and/or destination snapshot is wrong in FDISR, you can lose alot of softwares this way.

[dallen]

{QUOTE-> What if your source and/or destination snapshot is wrong in FDISR, you can lose alot of softwares this way. <-QUOTE}
Software that attempts to protect a user from his/her own actions risks being labled inflexible and not user friendly.

Let's face it, if I tell my computer to delete the entire Windows folder and it refuses claiming to be protecting me, that seems logical on the surface. However, what if I really want to delete that folder, I know what I'm doing, and I have good reason for doing so?

By allowing the deletion of the Windows folder, some users would say that the system is poorly designed claiming the system should protect itself. By preventing such actions, experienced users might loath the system for its inflexibity and not being user-friendly.

Putting warning dialogue boxes may help, but most users click through those blindly. Maybe having various modes could be useful in this regard. For example:

Dumbass mode: Does not allow the user to do stupid things
Expert mode: Allow the user to do whatever he/she wants

ErikAlbert,
No software is perfect for every user. Great software for you may not be worth a hill of beans for me. This is evidenced by listening to people argue over AV softwares. A really good software is flexible and reliable enough to make a lot of users happy. First Defense does just that. I think you may have to concede to the fact that if I'm willing to make sweet love to it down by the fire, it must be good.

[ErikAlbert]

Dallen,
It was just a reply to Peter's "oops no recent image".
My answer to this "oops the wrong snapshot".
Such remarks are valid for ALL softwares.

[Acadia]

{QUOTE-> I mean, I would make sweet love down by the fire kinda love. Yes, First Defense is that good of a software. <-QUOTE}
:thumb: 8)

Acadia

[Acadia]

{QUOTE-> What if your source and/or destination snapshot is wrong in FDISR, you can lose alot of softwares this way. <-QUOTE}
But then it would be your fault, wouldn't it, not the program's. And the way that I use FD, even if I made that kind of a mistake, I still wouldn't lose anything, I would simply have to redo it. The way that I use FD, not only can I "goback", I can also "go back to the future". 8)

Acadia

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> What if your source and/or destination snapshot is wrong in FDISR, you can lose alot of softwares this way. <-QUOTE}

Erik something I learned a long time ago and I apply it to First Defense, is once I select the source and destination, before I turn it lose I take both hands off my keyboard and put them in my lap. Then I take another look at the screen, and read what is says to myself. Only then do I click okay.

I learned this from a wise old systems guy years ago. He was doing something and suddenly he groaned when he realized he'd screwed up. Then suddenly he put his hands in his lap. Puzzled I asked hiim why he did that. His reply was generally when you screw up, if you type something immediately you most often will render what you just did unfixable, but if you get your hands away from the keyboard, and stop and think, you often can find an easy fix. Over the years this has proved to be a valuable lesson.

Pete

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> ...Such remarks are valid for ALL softwares. <-QUOTE}Software only does what you tell it to do. The "ooops" is an operator error. I doubt Peter2150 is that bad of an operator.

[ErikAlbert]

LOL. Does that make FDISR any better than ATI ? You can make mistakes in both and all other softwares as well. It's all the same for me and some people make more mistakes than others, because they are less carefull.
That's the same as bugs in softwares, because programmers make also mistakes, they are just as human as users.
The latest version has usually less bugs than the previous version.
IMO this is common for all softwares. What is new about that?

[crofttk]

{QUOTE-> ... You can make mistakes in both and all other softwares as well. It's all the same for me and some people make more mistakes than others, because they are less carefull... <-QUOTE}Precisely. I was merely making light of that in the context of Pete2150 making such an egregious error. I tried to make a funny and it must have lost something in the translation. Pardon moi.

[Acadia]

When I make a mistake in FD, I can correct it (the way that I use it, anyways, maybe others cannot because they use it differently); can the same be said about ATI? If you restore an image in ATI, can you get the old one back? Maybe so, I am not that familiar with ATI, even though I own it (I have never had to use it ;) )

Acadia

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> When I make a mistake in FD, I can correct it (the way that I use it, anyways, maybe others cannot because they use it differently); can the same be said about ATI? If you restore an image in ATI, can you get the old one back? Maybe so, I am not that familiar with ATI, even though I own it (I have never had to use it ;) )

Acadia <-QUOTE}
I can do things with ATI, I can't do with FDISR and vice versa. That doesn't make software better than the other. Both have their own possibilities and some are common.

[Acadia]

I have NEVER said that FD is better than ATI. All that I have said my last 3-4 posts is that with FD, at least the way that I use it, I can always back out from a mistake, that is, I can go back to the future, the way that things were before I did the restore if for some reason I do not like the restore.

Acadia

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Software only does what you tell it to do. The "ooops" is an operator error. I doubt Peter2150 is that bad of an operator. <-QUOTE}

I've had my share of moments. Thats why I so love FDISR. It rescues one from themselves.;D

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Precisely. I was merely making light of that in the context of Pete2150 making such an egregious error. I tried to make a funny and it must have lost something in the translation. Pardon moi. <-QUOTE}

Erik WHAT, me make an error. NEVER;D ;D ;D

[dallen]

{QUOTE-> I've had my share of moments. Thats why I so love FDISR. It rescues one from themselves.;D <-QUOTE}
I noticed you specifically used the word "love." Sounds like FDISR may be promiscuous.:'(

Regarding the which is better argument, I agree with ErikAlbert. Since they are in different classes of software, one cannot say with certainty that FDISR is better than ATI. That would be like trying to argue that Michael Jordan is better than Wilt Chamberlain. It would be a never ending debate that would yield no winner.