Safe mode image-experiment-imaging duration

v10, Windows XP-home-sp2, external USB2 Maxtor drive, NTFS format HD and external.

In order to learn more, I tried doing an image running the Recovery CD in full mode. The backup destination was a USB drive. It worked. It validated. It restored, so no complaints, but ...
- The resulting file size under Normal compression is 11.5 gig. The backup took 50 minutes, 20 to verify.
- Day before, I did a normal image to the same drive, but from Windows. Size was then slightly under 11.5gig. The backup took 18 minutes, 11 to verify.

How come I see this substantial time difference?

 

These times seem to be quite normal. The linux drivers on the rescue cd are usually about half the speed of the Windows drivers. Sometimes even slower than that.

On one of the tests I did to a usb 2 external NTFS drive to verify a 3.1GB image file:
Rescue cd: 9 min
BartPE cd: 5 min
Windows XP Pro: 2.5 min

The same image file on the internal SataII drive took only 63 seconds.

 

I think I have a buggy operating sytem and I can't copy an image using windows,( I can only mount in windows) Doing a 10 gig backup with the rescue disk to my external hard drive takes about 10 minutes. Recovery takes about 7 minutes ( my internal drive actual takes a little longer about 2 minutes longer each way)
This is with TI version 9.0 build 3677 I wonder if it is the type of USB drive or the size of the Ram in the operating system that would make the difference.
My USB drive has 2 plugs on the computer end ( 10 volts?) and I have 1 gig of ram. Any thoughts?? ( curious)

 

dbknox,

When you say you can't "copy an image using windows" do you mean that you can't create a backup running TI in windows?

It is odd that using your internal drives is slower than the external. What kind of drives are they? If they're older IDE drives then it's quite possible that the external is faster (unless it's old too...). Also, if you're saving the image to a different partition on the same hard drive, then it would be slower because the heads have to constantly move back and forth.

If you're running XP, have you tried a BartPE cd? If so, does it work? If it does, is the time faster than the rescue cd?

I don't think the amount of ram has anything to do with the speed (unless you didn't have enough). The two plugs on the usb drive are so you don't need to have an external power adapter. The drive requires more current than one usb port can provide.

 

OK. Good to hear it's not out of sensible limits

 

Hi MudCrab I am using win98se probably part of the problem. ( TI 9.0 build 3677)
I can not do a backup from windows environment. The only thing that works in the windows environment is the mount feature. I can't even use the Acronis progam that they ask you to down load to save a log. Anything that is made by Acronis, my operating system, just doesn't seem to like.
Yes my drives are old (older IDE drives set to DMA) and my external is new.
TI does not backup/image from the windows environment to any drive when I get to "proceed" at the end, my computer hangs.( when version 9 first came out I saw several posts with this problem but they dwindled over time....I presumed they were fixed for the users concerned). I spent a good deal of time with Acronis trying to fix the problem. They were even kind enough to send me version 8 and still no luck.
If I was to reinstall windows I am sure it would fix the problem. The next time I install windows it will be either XP pro or Vista. I will be updating to a newer computer in the new year.
Even though TI doesn't operate properly with my software I am extremely happy with it. I have recommended TI to three friends and they have had no problems ( all xp users )

But I wonder why my times seem to be faster then a lot of times stated by a lot of the people on this forum. I have noticed a few posts where they have stated faster results, they had 2 gigs of RAM. This made me wonder "does TI write to ram first and then to the drive". Does anybody know?

 

Since most people use some level of compression, it has to use RAM to run the compress/decompress algorithm rather than setting up a DMA channel and copying. Even without compression TI still has to interpret its archive file so even then it must use RAM. This also brings into play the processor speed which is another variable.

To what extent TI uses all available RAM, I don't know. Since you likely have older hardware it could be the Linux drivers are better optomized for your system than for later ones - just another guess since who knows how well various software components are optomized for various hardware.

 

If you have a spare drive you could reinstall it and give it a try without risking your current drive.

I suspect that seekforever is correct and the linux drivers are especially well suited for your hardware.

 

Thank you seekforever and MudCrab it's people like you and others like you that has helped me become successful using TI.
I am using old operating system but I have fairly new hardware. Mob,cpu etc. I also have 1gig of ram.
I reinstalled Win 98se and yes TI now works as it should when in windows environment.
I recover to my "old" image every once in a while, until I can install most of the software that I know I need.
I update my new image and I am able to recover back and forth from one image to another with no problems. What a nice piece of software Acronis! I just wish everybody on this forum could have such good results.

Merry Christmas to all.