TeraByte Product Release Thread

Thank you @puff-m-d. I installed 3.22a and can confirm it worked as expected creating a full backup. It took approximately 32 min for the backup and validation to complete, creating a 15.9 GB file size. To play it safe, I first uninstalled v3.22 followed by a restart.

 

Hello @wat0114 and @Peter2150,

You are both most welcome ...

 

Unfortunately the same issues occur using the RE Flash drive. I will post this in the Terabyte forum.

 

wat0114,

Have you created images of a BitLocked partition in TBWinRE before? With BitLocker you have always had to unlock the OS volume with manage-bde and use Read from Volume in IFW.

(eg... manage-bde -unlock C: -recoverypassword 098032-033550-457622-063591-281171-518969-471988-435237)

 

I don't use Bitlocker, so I suppose my issue is unrelated, and has nothing to do with this.

Will just upgrade and monitor. Getting to the bottom of this one is low on my agenda, I have Reflect images.

 

Hi Brian,

I usually just suspend bitlocker form within windows then boot into the Recovery flash drive. When I get time later this evening I'll try your method. Thanks!

 

Hi Paul,

Yes, this agrees with what I observed on my dual boot NTFS+EXT4 system drive. I don't use Bitlocker either, yet the imaging speed was slow and the file size was large. I believe there is some more bugs buried in their code but they are reluctant to get down to it for some reason.
Again, IFW/IFL is the only disk imaging software that I paid for. So for me quite a bit disappointed.

 

wat0114,

Do you get a normal sized image? I haven't tried that way.

I make a batch file for that manage-bde line and put the batch file on the TBWinPE flash drive. It's far easier to run the batch file than to type the number. Then use the Read from Volume option in IFW when you create an image.

For a restore you need to unlock the partition with manage-bde then do a normal IFW restore. It must be a partition and not an Entire Drive restore. BitLocker will be ON when you boot into Windows after the OS partition restore.

 

oliverjia,

Does this happen all the time on that computer? With both IFW and IFL? My test computer, a UEFI system, multi-boots NTFS and EXT4.

 

If memory serves me well, this happens on all my computers with such OS config. Yes with both IFW and IFL.

 

I just finished setting up my new work laptop (Dell 3567 i5-7200u) and performed some tests/backups.
partitions: ESP (fat32, EFI System), Microsoft reserved partition, OS (ntfs, windows 10), debian (ext4), home (ext4), WINRETOOLS (ntfs, Recovery partition), image (ntfs, dell restoration image partition), DellSupport (ntfs, diagnostic and recovery tools). Total occupied size ~47GB.
Backups to a usb3 ssd (validate enabled):
IFL 2.99 = 30,61GB in 12 minutes and 47 seconds
IFL 3.22 = 30.55GB in 11 minutes and 42 seconds

 

Hi Brian,

I got the TBWinRE to work using more or less your method described, except all I did was suspend Bitlocker protection from within Windows first, booted into the Flash drive RE, then did a Changes only backup enabling the Read from volume option. So the only thing I did differently from before is I selected the "read from volume" option. Terabyte Support advised me to do that. It created and validated the 1.5 GB backup in <7 minutes. If this seems slow, it's probably because I connect to my external backup drive using a USB 2.0 cable.

Thanks again for your help, Brian!

 

oliverjia,

When you do your next backup can you provide times and image sizes. Very strange IFL is slow and Macrium is not.

 

wat0114,

Thanks for that. I just found this and suspending BitLocker is described...

https://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=616

 

oliverjia,

Using IFL with SSD to SSD. Entire drive image of a multi-boot (Windows and Linux) GPT disk took 2 min 39 secs. No validation. Image size = 57.4 GB. i3-8100 CPU. 8 GB RAM. Gigabyte 360M D3H. So the hardware in the desktop isn't fancy, apart from the SSDs.

 

So far 3.22a looks like it may have fixed my issue. SO mode took a full image last night, and it's only 47 GB.

Edit: 1 GB incremental next day would indicate it's OK now.

 

lol Brian, your hardware is much better than mine. I have a few boxes with i7 2700K and i5 2500K with MSI main boards. I guess this slowness issue may be related to my hardware.

 

oliverjia,

I'd be interested to see your times for IFL and a Macrium boot disk.

I ran another test on a 6 year old computer. IFL, SSD to SSD. No validation. Time was 4 min 34 secs. Image size = 40.2 GB. i7-3770 CPU. 12 GB RAM. Asus Z77 Sabertooth.

On a MB/sec basis this is slightly less than half the speed of my new computer. Hardware is obviously a factor in imaging speed.

Out of interest, when I built the new computer I thought the IFW times were slow. I was using PHYLock. I changed to using VSS and imaging was three times faster than using PHYLock. I haven't seen this before. PHYLock and VSS times were always the same.

IFD and IFU (Image for UEFI) have always been slow for me. IFL is the fastest of the TeraByte apps.

 

@Brian K why so much difference between your two systems? From their specs I would expect your i7-3770 system to be a bit faster than your i3-8100?

 

Panagiotis,

I don't know. One of the OS on the new computer is the same OS as on the old computer. I restored the image, converted from MBR to GPT and ran TBOSDT to remove the old drivers. Then installed new drivers. Both OS "feel" identical.

 

From the size of the image and the time needed (i7-3770 system), it seems that either the ssd where you store the image has a write speed of ~244mb/s or you installed it on a sata2 controller instead of a sata3.

 

I checked in CrystalDiskInfo and all SSDs are on SATA III ports.
Here are the ATTO speeds in MB/sec for the SSDs. OS SSDs first and backup SSDs second. Write/Read speeds.

i7 system 505/530 495/530
i3 system 360/525 480/530

Those speeds don't explain why the i3 system has faster IFL backups as the read speeds on both OS SSDs are the "same" and the write speeds on both backup SSDs are the "same".

 

My maths for imaging speed...

i3... 57.4*1024/159 = 370 MB/sec

i7... 40.2*1024/274 = 150 MB/sec

 

Your maths are correct. (I do not remember how I came with the 244mb/s I was trying to fix the mess bootit uefi made of my disk..). You should ask TB unlimited about this difference in speed.

Now I have a question/problem that cannot figure out and hope you can enlighten me.
The original layout of my partitions was:
ESD(1), Microsoft reserved (2), OS (3), Root (7), Home (8 ), Image (4), WinRetools (5), Dell support (6)
I restored only the "Root" partition and IFD/uefi had the "brilliant idea" to change their order
ESD(1), Microsoft reserved (2), OS (3), Root (4), Home (5), Image (6), WinRetools (7), Dell support (8 )
How can this be fixed?
ps. I do not want to contact support (I'm totally ****** off at the moment and regret having bought/upgraded and used BootitUEFI)