ATI Home 10 compatible with diskkeeper?

Discussion in 'Acronis True Image Product Line' started by eamnomadic, Nov 17, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. eamnomadic

    eamnomadic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Posts:
    2
    I take regular ATI image copies to an external USB drive (and I have recovered successfully from it on a number of occasions, so I know it works).
    Because I take regular image copies, I periodically delete older image copies and assumed this could cause some defragmentation on the drive.
    When I try to run diskkeeper on the backup drive, it goes into some kind of loop, continuously reading (and writingo_O) the drive and I have to break it to end it.
    Since I have been using diskkeeper for a couple of years without problem, it appears to be something to do with ATI or the format it uses.
    Can anyone please throw some light on this? Is there something about the format of image copies that makes it incompatible with diskkeeper?

    eamnomadic
     
  2. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    There is nothing different about a TI tib file other than they tend to be very large. Does Diskeeper have enough spare room on the drive to do its shuffling?

    I personally wouldn't bother with a defrag on a drive that only holds images unless maybe it has been in use for a long time (whatever that means). When you delete an image you free up large blocks of space. It is not the same as writing a bunch of small files and then deleting a few in the middle causing fragmentation. This is my thought but I have no knowledge of the algorithm Windows uses to decide where to write data.

    My other thought about not bothering with defragging stems from the fact that image files are rarely if ever used which is quite different from some other files which may be accessed many times per day. Also, since a typical TI restore time is measured in minutes adding a few seconds onto the task doesn't really matter.
     
  3. mm00659

    mm00659 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    I agree with Seekforever. Don't bother with a defrag on your backup drive. Those files are static, and the one time you will use them, if they are fragmented, it doesn't matter. It might slow you down just a little to restore your system. A fragmented file is not a big problem comapared to the fact that you have to ......uh......restore your system. I have a thing against write cache on drives. If that drive has it enabled, disable it, then retry the defrag if it's that important to you.
     
  4. eamnomadic

    eamnomadic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Posts:
    2
    seekforever / mm00659

    thank you both for the replies. Great to get so quick a response.
    On the specifics you mentioned:
    - There is plenty of space on the drive for the defrag, so that was not the problem.
    - You are probably right that the benefit of defrag in this instance is marginal - I just have got into the habit of defragging my drives regularly.
    - The drive was marked for write caching. I removed that and diskkeeper now works on the drive.

    Again, many thanks to you both.

    eamnomadic
     
  5. Long View

    Long View Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Posts:
    2,295
    Location:
    Cromwell Country
    I use both AIT 10 and Diskeeper and have had no problems. Just wondering about the size of your backed up images and the amount of free space on your back up drive. Depending upon the version of Diskeeper and your settings it may be that diskeeper is being frustrated in its attempts to optimise such large image files. If you delete a few more of the older images you might dind that Diskeeper is then happy.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.