RollBack Rx and TrueImage Home

Hey, Peter, aren't you the guy that is bothered by the 0.0007% disk space commercial? Your continued interest is baffling.

 

Sorry, but I can't help you there Pete - I don't (and wouldn't) use RAID 0.

 

Pete, you might check with EAZ support (since they seem to be more responsive to email inquiries than HDS).

support@njanyue.com

~pv

 

Come on Wil, get your facts straight - it's .07%, not .0007% ...LOL

Fwiw, EAZ explains this claim (in their KB) to mean EAZ-FIX's overhead resource requirements:

 

Yesterday I received a free registration for my suggested improvement.

 

What was your suggestion; was it the EAZ-Clone modification?

 

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=822729&postcount=22
I modified eazclone060710.iso by adding a UDMA driver. The development team takes time to test the modification, so it's not available from their website yet.

 

@ pvsurfer: good to hear it works out good so far, but i've stopped testing it...can't really miss PD. I kept PD installed and sometimes analysed with it and it's heartbreaking to see the fragmentation and because I would only need RB maybe once a year or so PD is the "winner" on my pc. Btw defragging with PD with RB installed looked strange indeed, but didn't mess things up as far as I could tell.

 

Yeah, I miss using PD (old habits are hard to break). However, while each defragger has its own unique defragging scheme and algorithm (including RB's defragger), they all wind up doing the job well enough.

As long as I'm using RB I will be content using its snapshot defragger - which won't be difficult as long as RB continues to serve its principal purpose (protecting my system) without introducing system problems!

~pv

 

Well, PD certainly always has, but RB never used much time for a defrag, so I'm not really convinced about it's "well enough job". When each defragger has its own unique defragging scheme and algorithm then it must be RB and PD have the same...or am I missing something here?

 

I doubt that very much (I don't see why you came to that conclusion), but then again, it is possible.

 

Well, I guess that when I have defragged my partition with PD and then install RB and let it defrag that it would put everything in another order and it would take some time. More then a few seconds I would guess, but again maybe i'm missing something here.

 

It's my guess (wil or someone else may know better) that RB's snapshot defragger just optimizes its 'pointers' to the disk-sectors contained within each snapshot.

 

Yes, I think so too, but then it's a strange thing to compare the defrag of PD with that of RB. Horizon Datasys says :"RollBack Rx has a build-in snapshot defragmenter, use that to defrag your system. It's fast and it works with RollBack Rx. "... Indeed, it's fast, but defrag your SYSTEM with RB..?? You only defrag the miniature snapshots and not your disk/partition. Let's say I install RB , leave PD installed and install/uninstall softwares and just work with the pc as always and make snapshots now and again...wouldn't the disk be awfully fragmented after a not even so long time (you can see that with PD then) and get slower? Then you can uninstall RB, defrag with PD and install RB again, but will the snapshots still be available..?.. and, if so, when you go back to one of them there is the fragmentation again. (I think the only possible way to reinstal is with a new baseline btw, correct me if i'm wrong). Just a little to much hassle for me, because I defrag quite often. When you don't, ok, then it's not a big problem.

 

I defragged the system partition with Perfect Disk before installing EAZ-fix, including the offline defrag, that moves the MFT to the middle of the partition.
Now EAZ-fix is installed I still can defrag my second disk with my personal data (isn't that the area with most changes?) with Perfect Disk.
I defrag the snapshots with EAZ-fix whenever I delete a snapshot.

 

Well as an fyi, someone here said that Diskeeper works harmoniously with RB... But in defense of RB's defragger, I too install/uninstall quite a few progs weekly and my system seems as 'snappy' as always (and RB is the only defragger I've used over the last month)!

 

My system became a bit more "snappier" (loosened up) after RB was uninstalled while I had it installed a very short time and in that time I had only 1 program uninstalled, but according to your experience it will be systemrelated. Diskeeper I only liked in the win 98-days btw, have trialled it sometimes since then, but it always was slow on my pc so I won't ditch PD.

 

Well you gotta feel 'comfy' with what your doing, so whatever you decide to do, good luck to you. ~pv

 

I almost never defrag my other partitions, only C. Biggest part (4/5) of D isn't fragmented at all while it's months ago that i've defragmented. I defragmented C two days ago and it looks almost as "bad". A fragmented C has the biggest impact on my system, the others I don't notice.

 

Couldn't have said it better.

 

Yes during my testing with RB Rx for a week, I had Diskeeper running too. I do online/offline defragmentation. Adjust the FragShield setting, and let Diskeeper running in smart scheduling. Do rollback from a few snapshot without any problem.

Just for info about my system setting during those tests, I have two hard disk:
1. Disk 0 - “C:\” drive. ( Windows XP )
2. Disk 1 - “D:\” drive ( Backup )
- “E:\” drive ( Page files )