Semantic quibbles will only confuse the issue further. The essential point about the patching error is that it results in Windows loading an old service executable file instead of the new updated one. Thus the service version becomes "out of sync" with the main application version with consequences that may be more or less severe or not significant at all depending on the nature and extent of inter-version changes. In other words, as matters stand, the actual results of the sloppy patch packaging are purely "luck of the draw" for any given patch. I could quote Clint Eastwood, but I'll resist the urge.
Per your suggestion, I posted (a rather inept), I'm afraid, question about this - at least I bumped it. Hope it helps. https://forum.macrium.com/Topic14945.aspx
@JohnBurns -- It got you exactly the dismissive (just ignore the issue) response and from exactly the source that I expected there. An "unofficial" (or at least undeclared) reflection of the "official" attitude I mentioned earlier. __ P.S.: I took another quick look at your "bump" and I see that Nick Sills was reading that topic himself. So you might possibly get a different follow up response from him. Incorrect and off topic comment removed.
Do you think I should post these screenshots ? My backup seemed to run ok but this error was also posted in the event viewer today. UPDATE: I went ahead and posted screenshots in their forum just in case it might convince someone.
@JohnBurns -- Frankly, I'm doubtful even that or anything else you might post would have much impact on the apparent underlying attitude which seems to be something like: "If we got away with patching this time without actually wiping out anyone's entire hard drive, the causative sloppiness issue itself can simply be ignored, if not denied entirely." Despite Nick Sills' denial, I still suspect that future v7 patches may exhibit the same installation error, if they haven't already. Only time and user confirmation will prove me right or wrong about that as I'm not using or patching v7 myself. Having said that, I hesitate to advise you or anyone else about what to post or not post in Macrium's forums. I'll say only that you should do whatever you yourself think is best in your own interests and those of fellow users. If you do post that, you might want to start your own new topic. __ Afterword: Well that sure got you a brilliant answer from the same "unofficial responder", didn't it? -- "it wouldn't be related to having an extra copy of the file that's in a place it shouldn't be and that isn't being used." Impeccable dismissive logic, that. So please just ignore any possible connection to the fact that it does load an old service executable version that is out of sync with the current main application version that just might possibly have proper up-to-date descriptions for events and their significance. As for the underlying cause, well that's just a trivial "something Macrium can improve on" ... someday ... maybe. Please don't say I didn't warn you. Any discussions with that source just let Nick Sills dodge any implications for his own responsibilities anyhow and, considering that source's other jobs and interests, I find it very difficult to believe that the extraordinary amount of time he spends replying to Macrium forum queries involves no financial consideration at all.
In case this posting was aimed at me, there is nothing "semantic quibbles" in there. I just tried to give exact info, without the intention to offend anyone!!! Yes, I tried. We all have different backgrounds and come from different parts of the world. Enough said.
It wasn't aimed at anyone at all in particular and certainly not intended to offend. Just an attempt to keep the central point as clear as possible and free from confusing distractions that might arise from anywhere due to minor semantic inconsistencies that really have no bearing on that central point. Yes, of course we all have different backgrounds. I have no idea what yours is and I can only apologise most sincerely and beg your pardon if my comment seemed to belittle or disparage it in any way.
What's the alternative? I don't know. MANY users are convinced Macrium Reflect is THE program to use - not just in here, but over in Windows 10 Forums also. I guess I will just keep bopping along using it - with Aomei Backupper as a reserve and keep my fingers crossed that one of them will work when I NEED to restore my pc!
Is this error occurring in event viewer during backup? I just did a full image and not seeing any errors with latest 6 version.
@JohnBurns -- If you're asking me, I dunno about alternatives. It was just a "heads up" about a particular patching issue for whomever here it might concern. I'm still using Macrium v6 myself and I have no immediate plans to change. In view of Macrium's apparent dismissal of those concerns, however, I will be keeping very careful watch on all of their forthcoming patches and applying my own ad hoc fix for all of the reasons that I've already mentioned. @boredog -- AFAIK the MacriumService is only involved in handling scheduled backups and has a special role for any that are missed and that then run in the background on restart. That is not to say, however, that there are no other factors that might explain differing event logging results amongst various users. P.S.: I seem to recall that it may also have some role in applying Reflect's full>diff>inc order of precedence rules to simultaneously triggered scheduled backups, but an "old geezer's" recollection shouldn't be taken as authoritative on that point. In any case, integrity of that service itself is certainly important to proper execution of scheduled tasks.
@boredog -- You're welcome. Forgot to mention that MacriumService also has some license-related functions for some Reflect editions. That comes from Nick Sills himself, but as anyone would reasonably expect, without disclosing any details. One would think they'd be more concerned about correct versioning in the circumstances however.
I think it occurred when I deleted the x86 file - not sure. I have restored just now and all went well, so guess no problem exists since I deleted that file - hopefully.
Sorry, but I can't see how that hypothesis could be consistent with accepting the answer that you got in the Macrium forum saying that your reported issue "wouldn't be related to having an extra copy of the file that's in a place it shouldn't be and that isn't being used"?! At least you seemed to accept that by saying that you "just needed the reassurance". If it wasn't "related", how would removing it fix the problem?
I don't know that much about the whole situation - felt it was futile to press them about it since it would probably get me nowhere....and piss them off
Sorry again, but I'm afraid I don't understand that either. You know everything about the very straightforward essence of the issue as I've described it in post 5051 at the top of this page. There's nothing very complicated about any of those essential facts and, by verifying them yourself, you also know them to be true and correct. So I can't understand why would you run any risk of "pissing off" Macrium by posting anything at all in their forum and then concede as "reassurance" some response that is not in accordance with what you yourself have verified. That just reinforces their denial of any problem at all, let alone one that needs fixing. Oh well, never mind. I'm sure your intentions were good and, if you're happy with the result, I suppose that's all that really matters.
Yes, that is what I meant . Same for me. The reg-key and service are 'out of sync' now. Program Files (x86) contains the service updated by 1835.
Ur right - but there are so many other things going on in my life at the present - like the situation in this Country, health concerns, etc, that I have lost most of the "fight" I once had. Maybe that is good, maybe not, but at 82 years old, I am not going to let this be a major concern.
I'm probably not the best direct experience source on v7 and its scheduling as I tried it only briefly and then reverted to v6. The major changes were, as I said, the adoption of the Task Scheduler v2 API and the scheduling of backup tasks to run as SYSTEM by default. Users, especially upgraders, initially reported several problems (missed tasks, double runs, etc.) with the changeover so that Macrium eventually revised some aspects. Users can now specify an admin-level user other than SYSTEM for running tasks, for example. AFAIK, most of the complaints have now faded, but there still appears to be a few "leftovers" about task triggering inconsistencies. In fact, based on some incorrect replies to my own inquiries, there has been some misunderstanding amongst Macrium's own developers about how the WTS v2 API actually works. I can't say precisely to what extent such misunderstandings may affect their implementation of the WTS v2 API as I didn't try it long enough to find out. I'm afraid that's about all I can tell you about it myself. @Gorkster is here. Maybe you could try asking him.
I am now suspicious (with attendant mistrust) of the 'out of sync' marcriumservice.exe issue that @Arvy has pointed out. I have been using a scheduled GFS scheme, similar to @TheRollbackFrog, since January and it has always worked as expected: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/macrium-reflect.356309/page-138#post-2592506 But I have just noticed I now only have backups since the evening of the 18th / morning of the 19th of June. Could the above issue, starting with 1821, possibly be the cause? I can't say now with any certainty when the extra backups were deleted. Edit: I have also noticed my Incremental scheduled backup seems to backing up a Full every week instead of the defined every two weeks. All my backups are still showing in Task Scheduler as running under my user account. IIRC there was a change with Win10 AU. Should I recreate these scheduled tasks? Confused.
@paulderdash -- It's highly unlikely that the MacriumService, even if it is "out of sync" with the main app, would be responsible for "disappearing" any of your previous backups. That is normally a result of your retention and consolidation settings. On the other hand, the MacriumService certainly is involved in handling the scheduled backup tasks themselves in both v6 and v7. If you mistrust your Reflect installation's current behaviour, the most "sure-fire" remedy would be to use the download agent to get the current release's full setup.exe and reinstall it completely. The full installer does not have the same MacriumService misplacement problem as the patches and reinstalling it won't wipe out your existing user preferences and task definitions. As for removing and recreating your existing Task Scheduler jobs, that too would do no harm as a "confidence builder" if nothing else. P.S.: Yes, Macrium did make some Task Scheduler revisions to cope with unanticipated W10AU changes. Always use Reflect's own UI, not the WTS UI, for any job scheduling or changes thereto.
Thanks for that info. I may try your two suggestions, in that order. And yes, I am aware not to effect changes via the WTS UI.
You may also want to take a look at your retention settings. Some of Reflect's default templates (grandfather, father, son, etc.) use age-based retentions for each backup type. I've always changed mine to numeric values instead as I don't want my old backups removed on the basis of their age alone. But that's entirely up to each individual user, of course.
Done the full reinstall and will monitor my scheduled backups for now. And yes, Program Files now has the correct macriumservice.exe. Can I just delete the Program Files (x86) Macrium folder now?
