Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

? if you have a iso already just burn the iso to disc. you can use many programs to do this. imgburn, burnaware among many others will burn the iso right from the file.

 

Hi Waj

Hope that you are well? Emailed support re. a problem that I am having and have heard nothing back yet...would you be able to chase this up for me with your Support Team, please?

Cheers, Baldrick

 

Just remember if you build the recovery media on a 64-bit system,it will use 64-bit files and the recovery media won't work on 32-bit machines..

 

Just purchased my v2 license...keep up the great work

Terry

 

Hmm is it normal for hot/warm restores to take upwards of 20 minutes with not many changes at all? I don't remember V1 taking this long but I could be mistaken. =/

 

How many snapshots have you got?

 

Currently ten in total but I was experiencing this at even 6 snapshots.

Edit: I'll try making a new chain and then restoring the new single baseline snapshot and see how long it takes, then create a new snapshot and restore to that and then restore to the baseline snapshot... if that makes any sense..

 

I'm thinking the time is longer on Ver2 as well. I used to be able to do a restore with a month of snapshots in the time is takes to a little over a week now. Definitely not a fast once the restore begins.

 

1. Created Baseline
2. Restored Baseline (1:34 sec)
3. Created Test
4. Restored Baseline (3:29 sec)
5. Created Test 2
6. Restored Baseline (3:31 sec)
7. Restored Test 2 (2:37 sec)
8. Created Test 3, Test 4, Test 5, Test 6 & Test 7
9. Restored Baseline (3:55 sec)
10. Restored Test 6 (3:53 sec)

So perhaps not that big of a difference by simply creating new incrementals without much data.

Although with my old chain, I was at Snap 9/9 and created a new snap (snap 10) and then restored snap 10 and it took ~20 minutes... So my old chain might have been too... weird? Deleted it now since I don't have enough space to keep it if I start a new chain, which I must.

Edit: 20 minutes is kind of a long time when you often switch between snapshots because of beta testing. =/ Considering going back to V1 and see how that fairs, it feels like it did better at larger/more snapshots.

 

I'm not sure that brief test with that few snapshots will bring about the longer restores mentioned. Four or five snaps in a row with few to no changes isn't really a challenge for the restore process to look through for changes needing to be kept or addressed. I know it takes more than that for a slowdown to occur with me. Try it again in a few day and see if it's the same.

I even turned off the hourly snaps and have fewer, but the restore time wasn't shortened that I can tell.

 

Well yes, the point of the test was to test if simply having more snapshots in the list increases the restore time, regardless of the changes between them, doesn't seem like it.

I'll go on using V2 for now and see if it gets much slower at restoring after a few days/weeks. 20 minutes for nearly no changes isn't really that impressive, hopefully it was just something bad with that chain and it won't happen again.

 

I understand, but my point was that 3-4 shouldn't make much difference, 13 might and would qualify as "more" snapshots not such a small number.

You're right in that 20 minutes for what you're doing is a very long time, unless you have a very old and slow PC. But I think you are on to something. I've noticed slower restores and can't really put my finger on why. I hope you come up with something definitive.

 

so far i have had almost zero issues aside from a few small ones which they say they are working on. but i have to agree for me its VERY much slower than v1 was on any systems i have tried it on. i made a full image and then added one single notepad file for testing and the next snapshot took probably 15 minutes. and when there are many changes it took much longer. this is on a i7 (overclocked a good amount stable 24/7) with 32mb ram. so i know its not the system that is slow. also this was with a completely fresh install of windows 7 with only the added drivers nothing else as far as programs go. even the baseline for me was far slower then with v1.

 

I've noticed the restore I did recently taking a LOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNGGG time when restoring from a HD to a SSD. When I looked at Task Manager while it was restoring, I noticed that its CPU usage wasn't always constant (it went in spurts). Also, it froze at 73-77%. I am using the latest build of v2.0.

 

V2 is slow at restoring on my machine as well Hot or Cold restore,i have I7 evo SSD Sata 3 Motherboard 16 gig memory so it is not my machine,hope this can be sorted out as it defeats the object of using TM in my opinion.

 

Greetings all... just a thought here.

When thinking about possible SLOW restores (HOT or WARM), please remember that the same possible pre-BOOT activity that causes the very next snapshot to take a very long time (in v1, "External modification detected"), will also cause the very next RESTORE (instead of a snapshot) to do the same thing. In detecting this anomaly with the volume's status... v1 would tell you before any new snaps and not say anything before a fresh restore, v2 doesn't seem to say anything at all when this condition is detected.

Possibly a new method of managing snaps and restores has emerged with v2, I cannot tell... but the above anomaly must be kept in your thinking when trying to figure out strange timing with this application.

 

Hi,
I found one specific features already present in V1 that seems to be also present in V2. When I mount a backup as a virtual folder, and I perform a chkdsk /v on it, it really takes ages. When I try this with other imaging tools, I get a much faster result. To rephrase it, any mounted backup is very slow.

 

im talking about slow backups also though which i never saw in v1. v1 made backups (on this same machine) fast as can be. v2 takes at least 3-4 times as long to make a snapshot.

 

I am in this camp. For now I will stay with v 2. At a later date may go back to v.1. At any rate I will stay with AX64 in one form or another.

 

Just curious, is V2 as fast as V1 if you do a hot restore as opposed to a warm restore? As far as I am concerned 15 to 20 min is way too long for a warm restore and I will stick with V1 if this time frame is the norm.

UNLESS

If, in V2, if you do a hot restore (and it generally takes the same time as with V1) and it freezes (fails), can you then do a warm restore or do you have to do a cold restore?

 

BG, any incomplete restore leaves your storage element in an ambiguous state, therefore it must be completed with a COLD (or complete) restore to insure its integrity.

 

Is the discounted pricing still available?

It's September 15, and the website still shows 50% off.
When clicking through, though, the cart shows the full price ($64.95/39.95).
Also, the wilders coupon does not seem to work at all.

Any advice?

 

BG, from my observations, the HOT restore under v2 is the exact same process as v1... Command Prompt window, frozen cursor and all.

Personally I have not seen any of these extra-lengthy restore processes unless I'm doing the equivalent of a COLD restore (a WARM restore to a completely different OS baseline for instance).

 

Thanks Froggie, much appreciated

 

From the FWIW department...

I'm one of those users that can count the amount of HOT restore failures on 3-fingers since the beginning of the ALPHA test phase of this application... it's been very reliable for me.

So... I was using the HOT restore method to return to a completely different baseline configuration than what I'm currently rooted in (I've done this many times successfully) and at the 55% point, the flashing BackSlash/Vertical Bar/ForeSlash freezes and the 55% fails to move forward, basically what I remember the ol' HOT restore hang failure to look like. I look down at my computer's disk subsystem activity light and it's going like crazy... so I just relax to see what the end result will be. At about the right time, the system reBOOTs as expected and comes up in the configuration selected for the HOT restore.

I guess I'm just wondering if some folks who experience what appear to be HOT restore failures may not have been patient enough to allow the process to complete. My (3) very early HOT restore failures really were failures... they hung and never completed, leaving the system in a very ambiguous state, requiring a COLD restore to remedy the problem.