Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

Lets start a revolution...lol

MAYBE some developer will say, "You know this is what people really want, and I could make a fortune, IF I make a good product...

We can only hope...

 

I agree. I got the same error... Maybe we don't want the current developers to work on version 1....Maybe the old developers could do it (the original guys)... I mean apperently NO ONE wants to make something that is any different than what EVERYONE else is making...

 

Hi @manolito @rodneym!

Could you please e-mail info@ax64.com and iurie@realcopy.com, even if you have already, with this report and your FlashBack logs? Thank you.

In regards to working on v1 - that is in essence what we've always been doing.

We've gone through phases of improving hot restore, finding it to still be a flawed in implementation. We then moved to warm restore, which is very reliable and fast (restores <4 minutes). We can see users missed Windows hot restore, so we put our efforts into building native hot restore, which is what we're are testing together now. As reports show, it's really fast and comparable to MR 6 or faster.

Thanks and keep those reports coming through to our support mail. It goes a long way.

Waj

 

Waj, I have emailed requesting link for latest beta, but no reply?

 

@wajamus

I assume that V2 (or Flashback when the new beta version becomes available that does an hourly incremental backup) can read the .axd files created by V1. So, what are the risks of using V1 for the regular daily incremental backups and in case a restore with V1 fails, I can still use a boot USB with V2 to restore the system? Note that restore speed is not so important for me.
Also note that both PC's do not change from a hardware/configuration point of view. The 'MBR" and the UEFI system will remain like that.

 

Seems risky to me....

Here is what I do...

Install Win10, plus all fav must have software...
]
THEN the last thing I install is AX64TM V1....

Now direct it to BU C: and then browse to the folder in D: (or whatever) where your backups will be stored.

Now I make the first BU with AX64TM V1, then install any free piece of software... "ANYTHING" ...

NOW make your first incremental BU.... I just do this to test that I can go back to the first BU made by AX64TM V1

NOW once I know I can go back and forth between these 2 backups...

Then I BU my C: drive with Acronis or Macrium (or whatever)... This is now my base...

NOW AX64TM V1 works forever...

 

As the scheduler of Flashback is broken and the hourly incrementals do not run, does anybody know if there is a command line option to start Flashback every hour by Task Scheduler to force it to make the hourly incrementals?

 

Don't worry, I'm still having Macrium Reflect Free edition running too....

 

I think the Server version has a command line option, so presume that the regular version doesn't.

 

I have found that to be true. The archive format has not changed since early in the v1 ALPHA cycle.

Risks with v1 have been discussed ad infinitum in this thread... if you need to know, just sit back and read a while

My experience has shown that the imaging aspect of v1 has always been solid (and quick), it's only the HOT restore and limited partition management capability that has created the issues experienced by those seeing them. Since the imaging aspect of v2 hasn't changed much except for additional partition mgmt functions, its speed will be similar to v1.

Wanting to use v1 and saying "Note that restore speed is not so important for me" doesn't make too much sense to me at all... why not just use v2 (assuming it's working for you)? Anyway, when I have mixed COLD restorations between v1 and v2 (in either direction) it has always worked just fine. Just be careful... it's not an advertised supported feature, test diligently.

 

See your PMs...

 

P... I will try and duplicate and return with results.

 

It's pointless in trying tro explain something like this to a person like rodneym, whom doesn't even have manners to post in a proper way, without shouting and bold characters.
Well, I guess the mod's (hopefully) will act soon..

 

Froggie those risks still exist in V2. As long as AX64/flashback relies in a tracking file the risks will never be eliminated no matter if one performs hot/warm/cold etc. restore.
Macrium is reliable because it compares the files table between the archive and the partition in memory.
AX64/flashback is unreliable because it compares the tracking file between the archive and the partition. If something went wrong during the tracking the entire chain gets corrupted.

ps. by the way can you post some screenshots of the new flashback, if it does not break the beta agreement?

Panagiotis

 

No broken agreement ... they are exactly the same as "Time Machine" v2 (the term "Time Machine" replaced by "Flashback"). The only difference is that in the RECOVER process, the DEFAULT option is WARM (using a LOCAL BOOT of the special made Flashback WinRE) and if you select HOT (via the advanced options), behind the scenes it will look at the location of the image holding partition. If it's not something supported at the Native NT API level, it will select the WARM path above. If it is, it will invoke a restoration process at the pre-Windows point where the NT API is available (like ChkDsk, BOOT time defrags, and (God help us) the Norton very aggressive scanner).

 

Generally agree. Two questions to be asked here... how much more vulnerable is the use of a "Tracking File" (as far as corruption is concerned) compared to any Windows FileSystem file ($MFT, etc.)? The main issues that have been positively (publicly) identified have dealt with Lite Virtualization and BOOT time processes. The BOOT time process is clear... the Flashback required driver to manage the Tracking File is not loaded at that time so there's most likely no way to "tracK' activity at that level. This, of course, will invalidate the tracking reference.

The LV issue is that the tracking is suspended during the LV process, and if any files changed under the LV process are preserved while coming out of it, once again, the tracking has been invalidated.

If the user really understands these limitations (XeroWeight should document these areas clearly for its users... I don't believe it ever has), can he/she not make a command decision to determine which is more important to them... LV/BOOT time processes or a somewhat speedy snapshot-like environment? Of course Macrium REFLECT's method of detecting FileSystem changes is clearly superior, but the above question still remains.

Flashback is vulnerable, "fer shur"... but in the hands of knowledgeable users, it can be very useful.

No, this is NOT a sales pitch... just a technical discussion

 

The problem is not how much vulnerable it is.
The problem is that when the tracking breaks and AX64 missed identifying it, it will continue to create incrementals with broken file table references.
e.g. I relly on AX64 for my backups -> tracking breaks AX64 failed to identify it -> I continue to create incrementals that are corrupted -> when I need to recover the system it does not boot and I have no way of knowing which was the last good incremental so I'll have to ditch the entire chain except the baseline.
= it fails it's purpose of continuous backups

And with OS like windows 10 with its forced updates it can happen anytime.

Panagiotis

 

True, but this reminded me also another problem of AX64.
Let's say that the chain is fine but the tracking broke on the live system (no image was taken afterwords even though the user and AX64 did not realised it).
Every attempt to perform a fast restore hot/warm will result in a broken file table of the partition and if one is lucky the system won't boot (he will be forced to perfom a full restore)... if he is unlucky the system will boot but some files will be corrupted without him realising it (and if he starts a new chain and deletes the good backup he will remain with only the corrupted files...).

Panagiotis

 

Why is Flashback ALL BIG LETTERS. Do they stand for anything? Asked the same question of AOMEI.
Trend toward uppercase shouting in product and company names is catching on wildly. Its value as an attention-getter thus great reduced, and there may even be a flashback by consumers.

 

FlashBack indeed takes these measures, and if it detects any anomaly simply performs a full restore/full backup.