Macrium Reflect

Nope... v6 (and maybe v5, never checked it) will not let you create a RECOVERY MEDIA on anything other than a USB-connected FAT32 formatted partition, a CD/DVD or an ISO file. It will not let you create the recovery media on a NTFS formatted partition... at least when using the "Other tasks/Create bootable Rescue media" function.

 

Although the above "feature" does not work with NTFS volumes, if I RMprep a UFD as a NTFS BOOTable volume, I am then able to copy over the Windows specific files from a FAT32 prepared image and all works fine with that NTFS BOOTable UFD.

<sigh...> Why do they make these things so difficult? If it can BOOT from an NTFS formatted volume, why don't they just let me make one instead of forcing me into FAT32 for my RECOVERY MEDIA? Yea... take that, Macrium!

 

I agree, Pete... they just need to make the scheduling a bit more user friendly so that folks with hourly (or whatever) needs can more easily set that up.

I find the RAPID DATA RESTORE pretty much as quick as I've experienced with AXTM's WARM restore... when it works.

 

I'm wondering:

1. Can you disable the pop-up that comes up every time a scheduled backup kicks off; and
2. Has anybody tested the speed of RDR restores once the incremental chain is somewhat long?

 

Yes but RIR only lets you take 10 snaps and I would guess that means the last 10 hours is all thats available to you. Also, you have to anchor selected files if you want to have access after a revert. I like better coverage. I am not looking to AX64 as necessarily reliable. For that I would look to MV6. AX64, if a hot restore works thats fine, if not I would do a Delta Restore with MV6 and then recover any files I need to recover from a AX64 snap. Mind you maybe 10 hourly snaps is fine with RIR, along with snaps with MV6 every 6 hours. Is there any indication of the merging schedule for MV6 snaps?

 

Thats good, its nice that the user sets that rather than the developer.

I used to use GoBack which recored all changed files etc so when I switched to RollBack Rx I was not happy that snaps were hourly. I got used to the idea that I could potentially have to redo up to an hours worth of work,,,,,I really did not have much choice so I had lived with it. Then along cam AX64 and I dropped Rx (like a hot potato) and used it. I also run 12 Ghosts Backup, a versioning program so that certain critical files are versioned but I often have to work outside of the saved folder for 12 Ghosts. I do graphics work as well as audio so a miss of an hour can rep a lot of lost time, a miss greater than that,,,,well that would be a real problem. Occasionally I need to go back days to recover something I am working on but for which I need an earlier iteration,,,,,,its a bit of a challenge. GoBack was best for me but when Symantec bought it they, of course, ruined it so I had to move on. NOw that AXTMs future (and present) looks problematic I need to find an alternat. I had hoped it would be MV6 but it looks like that will only be a partial solution. I am open to suggestions though and if I can get some combination of RIR and MV6 to cover me I would be pleased.

 

Thank you Pete,

your test was probably one of the hardest a partial/selective restore can get (the hardest would be to use a scrambling tool). And now the questions that popup through my head are:
- how advanced this RDR is?
- is it really sector based (as we all assumed) or is it also file based? Or maybe both, depending on the amount of the data that is changed (e.g. performs a sync between the image and the partiton)?
- and if it is only sector based, could it be that when a lot of changes are involved it does not rely exclusively on the file table but takes an approach similar to IFW when restores differences only (e.g first reads each sector to be replaced and only if the data is different from the image's sector it gets written to the disk)?

Now you got me really curious.
Thanks again,
Panagiotis

 

Pete if it's not too much to ask, could you also perform a fragmentation analysis report/screenshot
1 before you take the snapshot, 1 after you scramble and 1 after you perform RDR? It will help us understand if it is only sector based or depending on the situation reverts in file based restore.

thanks,
Panagiotis

 

With perfectdisk after you perform an analysis perfectdisk gives you the statistics tab. There select the "analysis results" and the save them to a pdf file.

Panagiotis

 

I presume there's a reason you can't expand the 12 Ghosts coverage to all of your files?

 

I don't know why.
Reflect eats AX64 for reliability. It has never let me down yet.
And I am looking forward to v6.

 

Each file/folder has to be individually set up to be monitored, its just not practical. In addition most files I do not need versioning for,,,,that is,,,until I do.

With a program like AX64/TM I get the entire PC, all the time, in a format that does not eat the entire storage drive for supper. In fact I may just use it going forward for the ability to preserve my data files. Not use it all all for reversions (I would use MRV6 for that). Apart from the fact that AX64 periodically shuts itself off its very good for taking hourly snaps of whats changed on the drive since the last snap and making it easily available for recovery. I own a licence,,,,I may as well use it even if only for that.

 

They really are (well were) 2 different animals,,,,at least they were until MV6. Now they are comparable but before not so much. It looked for a while like AXTM was close to becoming reliable with the advent of the latest beta but thats gone by the wayside now. But you are correct, given MRs history it is expected that MR v6 will be very reliable as well. Of course only time will tell if it is,,,,it is in very early days yet n'est pas.

 

I'm in a similar boat as you - I want versioning plus quick system restores (and preferably windows explorer right-click integration for restoring individual files). I've yet to find a perfect solution.

Just in case it's of interest and you're not aware, AJC Active Backup is similar to 12 Ghosts but will do delta versioning so is very space-efficient.

Now back to Macrium..

 

That's basically what I'm saying. I was referring to how the thread itself is very active with everyone comparing notes on the new Macrium V6. The AX64 thread was also very active in the early posts. I am looking forward to V6 as well.

 

Thanks I will take a look at it, much appreciated.