TB's IFW - Cannot Create Image

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by puff-m-d, May 8, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. puff-m-d
    Online

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    Hello all,

    I tried to post this over at the TeraByte site but I could not create an account. They have a system called "VouchSafe" to verify you are an actual person and all I get are errors with it, so I could not create an account.

    Here is an example log file of what is occurring:

    [ 5/08/2012 12:02:49 am] /b /uy /um /priority:4 /base:N:\IFW\2012-05-wk1\Backup-w0-2012-05-06-2305 /f:N:\IFW\2012-05-wk1\Backup-w0-chg-$~YYYY$-$~MM$-$~DD$-$~HHMM$ /v /enc:3 /pw:xxxxxxxx /desc:HP_(C:)_Partition_Differential_Backup
    [ 5/08/2012 12:02:49 am] Image for Windows 2.71 (GUI)
    [ 5/08/2012 12:02:49 am] Starting HP_(C:)_Partition_Differential_Backup...
    imagew.exe /b /uy /um /base:"N:\IFW\2012-05-wk1\Backup-w0-2012-05-06-2305" /f:"N:\IFW\2012-05-wk1\Backup-w0-chg-$~YYYY$-$~MM$-$~DD$-$~HHMM$" /v /enc:3 /desc:"HP_(C:)_Partition_Differential_Backup"
    [ 5/08/2012 12:02:49 am] PHYLock is waiting for drive writing to stop ...
    [ 5/08/2012 12:05:38 am] PHYLock Started
    [ 5/08/2012 12:05:38 am] PHYLock Using RAM
    [ 5/08/2012 12:05:38 am] PHYLock version 8
    [ 5/08/2012 12:05:40 am] Backup: Drive 0 (C:) HP Partition (01) 610478 MiB HPFS/NTFS
    [ 5/08/2012 12:05:40 am] To: N:\IFW\2012-05-wk1\Backup-w0-chg-2012-05-08-0002.TBI
    [ 5/08/2012 12:14:14 am] Unable to open file
    [ 5/08/2012 12:14:14 am] INFO: Total Sectors:1250258562 Total Allocated:97501968
    [ 5/08/2012 12:14:15 am] Deleting incomplete or failed backup.
    [ 5/08/2012 12:14:15 am] Operation Completed with Error Code 6
    [ 5/08/2012 12:14:15 am] Stop

    What happens is the creating image part goes fine, then at the moment between finishing the image and starting the validation, IFW shuts down. No file has been saved to disk and I get a log typical of the one posted above.

    I have been using IFW for more than a year with no problems. None of the hardware has changed and I have done a check disk on all drives. I have checked permissions and security on all folders where the images are saved. No where have I found a problem. I did add the /hash command line a couple of weeks ago but it has been working perfectly until now. I have no idea what has changed on my system to be causing this. I have even done an uninstall the reinstall in case something had been corrupted in the IFW installation.

    I am at a loss and a dead end and need your help. Since I cannot post over to the TB forum, I really hope someone here can point me in the direction I need to be going.
  2. MudCrab
    Offline

    MudCrab Imaging Specialist

    It doesn't look like the backup is finishing (the validation phase never starts).

    What happens if you try to save a different partition to N:?

    What happens if you try to save C: to a different drive (not N:)?

    Does a full backup complete successfully to the same destination?

    Does it make a difference if the image is not encrypted?

    Does this full image base have the hash file? If so, does it complete if you remove it (rename it or move to another location)?

    Did the problems start only after upgrading to 2.71?
  3. puff-m-d
    Online

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    Hello,

    In answer to your questions:

    What happens if you try to save a different partition to N:? No difference.

    What happens if you try to save C: to a different drive (not N:)? No difference.

    Does a full backup complete successfully to the same destination? Yes, full backups always complete.

    Does it make a difference if the image is not encrypted? No difference.

    Does this full image base have the hash file? If so, does it complete if you remove it (rename it or move to another location)? Yes, I am using the /hash command line and the file is created. I wonder if the hash is verified along with the image?

    Did the problems start only after upgrading to 2.71? Not exactly. I installed 2.71 the same day it was released and started using the hash at the same time.
  4. zfactor
    Offline

    zfactor Registered Member

    so it works without the /hash and it can complete to a different destination?

    does it complete without the auto verify command? can you make a backup without the verify and if it finishes then try to verify it after and see what happens....
  5. puff-m-d
    Online

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    OK, here is what is known up to this point.

    • Full backups work fine but differentials cannot be created.
    • The newest version 2.71 along with the /hash command line have been used since day of release. Problem just started.
    • The process is stopping right before the creating stops and validating starts, so validation is not in the picture.
    • If a non hash full backup is created or the extension of the created hash file is changed, then the differential completes successfully along with validation.
    • Origin or destination drive/file makes no difference.
    • Encryption makes no difference.
    • Log file always looks similar to one posted above when error occurs.
  6. MudCrab
    Offline

    MudCrab Imaging Specialist

    So, basically, it's having a problem with the current full image when there is a hash file.

    Do you still have an older full with a hash that previously worked to create a differential? If so, does creating a new differential against that full image work now or does it fail too? (Just trying to see if the problem is any hash file now or if it's specific to the current full image.)
  7. puff-m-d
    Online

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    Hello,

    Yes, with or without hash a full backup always succeeds, where a differential based on the hash always fails. No hash on a differential and the image creates fine.

    I had a lot of images and a lot of hash files where I had been experimenting with the new features. I also had a backlog of 16 weeks (one full, 6 differentials per week) so my backup drive was getting full. Since everything was working fine (or so it seemed) I decided to purge my backup drive, so in short, I no longer have any full images with their associated hash file. Later tonight or in the morning, I am going to do a full hash with no encryption just to double-check and be sure that encryption is not a factor. I had verified this but it was late and I was falling asleep, so I will do this again to be sure. It is obvious validation is not an issue since it never quite gets to that stage.
  8. puff-m-d
    Online

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    Hello,

    I tried every variation I could think of and the problem is definitely centered on the /hash command line. No matter how I set up IFW or what source or destination drives were used, it always came down to whether /hash was used or not. Try to create a differential based on a hash file, it would always fail. Try doing a differential any other way and it would work. Since I cannot create an account on the TB forum and if no one comes up with some ideas with this, then I guess I need to figure out how to contact TB by email. Thanks for the help thus far and in advance for more.
  9. puff-m-d
    Online

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    Hello,

    After conversing directly with TeraByte, the problem is with the hash files and has only affected a very small number of people. I was informed they have a fix and it will be in the next release (2.72). Excellent support as always from TeraByte!!!
  10. puff-m-d
    Online

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    Hello all,

    Just an update in case anyone else is having a problem with hash files and differential update problems involving the new 2.71 feature of speeding up differential creation times.
    So it looks like a rough release date for 2.72 with the bug fix sometime around the 12th or so, maybe little sooner or later.

    It also looks like there are some nice surprises coming since it was eluded to this next release could have very well been a major upgrade to 3.0.....
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.