FD-ISR problems with Vista

I have Raxco RX Suite and perfect disk 8 with FD-ISR and they work fine together. At least on my system.

 

No, after my single defrag with PD8 trashed FD-ISR and nearly caused a disaster on my XP PC, I uninstalled PD8 and lost all interest in it. I'm just funny like that.

Raxco support contended what I experienced couldn't have happened and I was reluctant to even mention it on this board since I realize so many folks here use FD-ISR and PD8 together with no issues. Perhaps it was sheer coincidence FD-ISR failed on my old PC immediately after running PD8. Perhaps the crisis was caused by sunspots or angry gods. In any event, I've never had PD8 and Returnil installed on any PC at the same time and PD8 has never been installed on my Vista PC. There's no connection between Returnil and the long snapshot times with KIS since that problem preceded my installation of Returnil.

I notified Raxco support about the red cross occasionally appearing on my FD-ISR system tray icon for a prolonged period and reminded them that 5-10% of the time when I reboot the FD-ISR icon never appears in the notification area. When this happens, ISRMonitor.exe has failed to start up. Their response was "It should show as soon as the system comes up. I’ve never seen a latency with it." Gee, I knew it "should show" and I'm experiencing more than just a "latency" on my PC. Raxco didn't evince any interest in pursuing the matter. Since I appear to be the only person reporting the problem and they no longer sell FD-ISR, I suppose there's no reason for them to want to devote time and resources to the matter.

I'm in the process of experimenting with making FD-ISR snapshots with different antivirus programs installed. So far, KIS is the only AV to cause unduly long snapshot copy times.

 

Hello Pete,

I'm pretty sure the person I'm dealing with at Raxco support is your "contact." I'm also pretty sure that person and I are getting tired of exchanging mostly futile e-mails. I know I'm getting tired of running tests which seem to be increasingly pointless.

Raxco/Leapfrog believe my experiences with extremely long snapshot copy times with KIS installed is due to KIS's filter driver. Then they assert there is no problem with using FD-ISR together with KIS. IMO, the fact a snapshot which takes an hour or so with NOD32 (or several other AVs) installed takes 3.5 hours to create with KIS v7 installed is a "problem." Kaspersky support won't even respond to my inquiries to them on this subject. It appears I have the choice of either keeping KIS and enduring extremely long copy/update times or use a different AV. What I don't understand is why more KIS/KAV and FD-ISR users aren't experiencing, or at least reporting, the unduly long snapshot times I am.

I find the occasional failure of ISRMonitor.exe to start up (and thereby no FD-ISR system tray icon) to be a minor nuisance. Rebooting doesn't bother me as much as it does some other folks here. I reported the problem to Raxco multiple times and they exhibited zero interest. This occurred rarely on my XP PC but more frequently (5-10% of the time) on my Vista PC. The issue of a red cross sometimes appearing and remaining on my FD-ISR icon (for more than a few seconds) is a new problem and may be attributed to DVD+R's budding interest in sorcery. When DVD+R achieves a more complete mastery of spell-casting, I have a long list of politicians, attorneys, judges, BATF agents and SWAT goons I want turned into toads.

When I installed BitDefender Internet Security 2008 yesterday, I noticed a red cross would remain over the FD-ISR icon until I closed out of BDIS's nag screen wanting me to purchase/register the product. Only once has such a red cross symbol eventually failed to disappear; this occurred when I rebooted to exit a Returnil session. I hope that event was an isolated instance.

 

My Sorcery is indeed Sublime Several undesireables have been vanished without a trace with just my say For a fair price I can eliminate all your unwarented problems, and Share my Secret in Prestidigitarianism

Note: Did you notice Rosie O'Donnel isnt on TV anymore I Banquished her to the land of Irritiblebowlsyndrome

 

I feel like I'm writing this from the Twilight Zone. Raxco support wanted me to make some new NOD32 and KIS snapshots and monitor the data transfer rates. Since I was busy testing different security suites with FD-ISR, I nearly didn't bother with this chore since I thought it would be pointless. Since snapshots made with KIS installed took three times longer than with other AVs, I figured the transfer rate had to be slower. I'm stunned by the results I just experienced:

First, I booted into a snapshot with NOD32 (actually Eset Security Suite beta 2 which has some bugs in it) installed. I deleted all regular snapshots except for two: one with ESS and the other with KIS v7 (my original primary snapshot). I then copied the ESS snapshot into a new snapshot. I recorded the transfer rates at three stages during the copy process:

ESS snapshot - size: 18.75 GB - time to create: 53 minutes

Time elapsed - Transfer rate

15 minutes - 2890 KB/second
31 minutes - 6030 KB/second
48 minutes - 6200 KB/second

Next, I rebooted into the KIS snapshot and deleted the snapshot I'd just made. Then I set FD-ISR to creating a new snapshot by copying the KIS snapshot. A few minutes into this process, a KIS popup window appeared saying "Please restart your computer to complete the installation of new or updated protection components." I postponed rebooting so I could complete the snapshot currently being created. At the 15-minute mark, I checked the update window and nearly fainted. Here are the results:

KIS snapshot - size: 18.91 GB - time to create: 60 minutes

Time elapsed - Transfer rate

15 minutes - 2740 KB/second
31 minutes - 4940 KB/second
48 minutes - 5710 KB/second

I have no idea why snapshots this size which previously took 3.5 hours to make with KIS installed suddenly just took one hour. I was mesmerized watching the update window as KIS snapshots were processed quickly. The only change I can think of to this snapshot configuration was the message I received saying KIS had downloaded/installed some program update. That update hadn't even been fully installed when this snapshot was made since I hadn't rebooted yet.

I rebooted, deleted the new snapshot then, in the expectation of copying an identical size snapshot with KIS as the one I made with ESS installed, I set FD-ISR to copy the ESS snapshot into a new snapshot. Here are the results:

KIS snapshot (copy of ESS snapshot) - size: 15.85 GB - time to create: 51 minutes

Time Elapsed - Transfer rate

15 minutes - 4570 KB/second
31 minutes - 5570 KB/second
48 minutes - 5580 KB/second

I was astonished a snapshot made with KIS installed was actually created in less time than an ESS/NOD32 snapshot ... until I checked the size of the snapshot: 15.85 GB. I have no idea why a copy of the ESS snapshot made when ESS was the primary is 18.75 GB while a copy of the same snapshot made when KIS is the primary is only 15.85 GB. I would have thought a copy of a specific snapshot would never change its size so long as no files were added or removed from it. Perhaps Peter2150 will have a cogent explanation for this.

As confused as I am about this 2.9 GB discrepancy, I'm far more astounded that snapshots with KIS installed are now, for no obvious reason, suddenly being created as fast as snapshots made with other AVs installed. I don't know if my KIS/FD-ISR problem is now history or whether this is a temporary condition. I don't know whether the KIS program update is responsible or whether I have DVD+R, my favorite wizard, to thank for this sudden development.

 

I'm puzzled as to why you would want so many snapshots with different AV's and other Considering the initial size of these snapshots lets take a look shall we

Eset snapshot = 18.75GB ( similar size to a Windows Vista Ultimate snapshot)

KIS snap = 18.91 ( ) <<< says enough I think

KIS snap (Eset copy) = 18.85GB
in total these equal 56.51GB, and you wonder why they take so long Your making you PC push enough RAM to handle 56GB of files and programs, + I suspect you dont defrag each snap when you create it, causing a build up of fragmented files

looking at your transfer rates, it would appear your either on Pentium 4.. 3Ghz
or less. My transfer rates are 15000+ on AMD Athlon 64x2 Dual Core,and take about 20-25 mins for an 18GB snap, dont forget that Copying a snap does not include temp files like as what the Primary snap did, hence the lower size.

I'll just add that today, I killed off FD-ISR cause of its huge snaps, and Installed Rollback Rx Pro 8.1 (new version) My Drive is 298.1GB and after installing Vista Ultimate, and adding Office 2007 Enterprise, Works 9, Microsoft digital Image 2006 Suite, Microsoft Student with Encarta Premium 2007 , Roxio Media Creator 9 Premium Suite, Avira Premium Security. My Drive has 282GB free which means I only use 18GB for all thies together
Although I did clean out nearly 675MB of junk before I installed Rollback.

So looking at the facts and figures your setup uses 38.51GB more than mine I'll not be hurrying back to FD-ISR looking at this result

 

1. The only reason I have more than one AV installed (in different snapshots) in my PC is, as I've explained previously, because FD-ISR snapshots were taking three times longer to copy/update with KIS v7 than they took with NOD32, the AV I used before installing KIS. Raxco/Leapfrog support wanted me to perform various tests which mandated making numerous snapshots with KIS and other AVs.

2. I normally only have one AV installed and use only two regular snapshots. I keep four archive snapshots; two stored on a second internal hard drive and two on an external hard drive. Since FD-ISR is designed for up to ten regular snapshots, I don't think two is an excessive number. I update the regular snapshots so one is reasonably current to my primary and the other is a couple days old. Despite having what you regard as "many" [i.e. two] snapshots, I currently have 233 GB of free space on my C drive.

3. I defrag my C drive frequently. There is so little fragmentation on my C drive that the most performance improvement any defrag has made to date is 1% (usually less).

4. A "Pentium 4.. 3Ghz or less"? My Vista PC is an HP Pavilion m8120n which comes standard with a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 processor with 8 MB of shared L2 cache and 3 GB of RAM. The Vista System Performance Rating score for my PC's processor is 5.9 out of a possible 5.9. The RAM score is 5.2 out of a possible 5.9.

5. I understand temporary files aren't copied when FD-ISR snapshots are created. Since temp files are never copied, what difference in size should it make whether I copied my ESS snapshot to a new snapshot when the ESS snapshot was my primary or not? The sizes I listed were those of the finished snapshots, not the initial size including temp files. The second ESS copy I made was 15.85 GB, not 18.85 GB as you wrote. The point I was attempting to make is I can't fathom why both Eset snapshots weren't 18.75 GB since they should be identical copies of the same files.

6. The times you gave are similar to mine for creating archive snapshots stored on an internal drive, not my regular snapshots which take longer.

7. The space occupied by two FD-ISR snapshots stored on each of three 320 GB hard drives is inconsequential to me. ATI and Paragon backup images are significantly larger and I have space for two images from each program on each of my backup drives with plenty of space left over.

8. I genuinely wish you the best of luck with the latest version of Rollback Rx. I've read enough unfavorable reports concerning previous versions that I'm able to restrain my enthusiasm to try Rollback Rx any time soon. When it comes to backing up my system, I'm interested in as near perfect reliability I can find, not saving space.

9. BTW, I'm curious about your avatar. Is Manchester United the logo of a women's lingerie chain such as Victoria's Secret here in the USA or the sign of your favorite neighborhood pub?

 

The first and third snapshots I listed above were copies made from the same source. I don't use data anchoring and temp files aren't supposed to be copied by FD-ISR. I can't comprehend why both snapshots aren't an identical 18.75 GB in size.

I'm hanging. But if I have to jump through many more hoops for different software support types, I may need to get licensed as a domesticated animal.

One of my problems in getting SupportInfo files to Raxco is their size. After this latest series of snapshots, I had FD-ISR create a 1-day SupportInfo file. It was 405 MB zipped down to 28.5 MB. 8 MB is about the limit of file attachments I can successfully transmit via dial-up and that's a chore. For me to be able to send Raxco SupportInfo files of this test, I'd have to zero out FD-ISR's activitiy log, create a single snapshot, generate a SupportInfo file then repeat that process for each following snapshot. That would get real old quick. I e-mailed Raxco the transfer rates and related information. I hope that will suffice.

Swell. I feel much better now. Imagine what the transfer rates were when it was taking 3.5 hours to make snapshots with KIS installed.

Is there anything I can do to improve the transfer rates? My PC is supposed to have a blazing fast quad core processor. Is it a matter of Vista vs. XP? Or am I being punished for not being a "nice person?" [sniffle]

I was thrilled to discover KIS snapshots were suddenly, mysteriously, no longer taking 3.5 hours to make. Now, I learn my transfer rates are still terrible. Curses!

Updating snapshots is always much faster than creating new ones. I seem to recall reading somewhere on this forum that after snapshots reached a certain age they might become unreliable so it was better to create new snapshots from time to time rather than continually update them. Or is this, as fce would say, a "myth"?

 

Do you live under a Rock Surely you must know the greatest Soccer team in the History of Mankind Womens lingerie Indeed Do you want to be turned into a Tribble or a Gremlin or Maybe I'll turn you into a worm and dangle you in the Water to Catch Fish

 

I decided to do some reorganizing with My PC, in the last month I must have reformatted a dozen times or more So today I did the following:

1:Wiped My Drive thouroughly with WipeDrive (The Best there Is)
2:Installed Windows Xp Professional
3:Installed Raxco Perfect Disk 8 and thouroughtly Defragged
4:Installed FD-ISR and thouroughly defragged both snapshots
5:Installed Vista Business on Empty Snap and repeated the Above
6:Created Baseline Snap for Each OS, so I have Primary, Secondary & Baseline

with no extra Software installed XP = 1.15GB or 0%
and Vista Business = 10.21GB or 3% using 35GB Total use for All 6 Snaps, and it runs Smooth as Silk