build 2302

The new build seems to work ok.
However, verifying backup (even incremental) in secure zone takes almost one and half hours. Apparently the entire secure zone is being verified. I feel only the fresh archive being created should be verified> Any comments?

 

I see your point, but I disagree. This would only be valid if the 'fresh' archive were the only thing needed to do a restore. If the base images have been corrupted then the result of the verification on just the fresh archive is meaningless. A quicker option than that, which has the same level of conclusion is not to verify at all.

IMHO, a verification needs to take place on all files required to do a restore.

 

Hello scaa,

Please note that when you verify the incremental backup, the program checks all previous incremental backup files and the initial full backup.

If you encounter any problems with the latest build please feel free to contact us.

Thank you.
--
Irina Shirokova

 

In the secure zone, if a fresh image is verified as OK, is there any possibility for the same image to subsequently become corrupted for whatever reason? If so, then what you and Irina say is definitely right, but if such possibility of earlier verified images becoming corrupt subsequently is NOT there, then it would be better if only fresh ones are verified.

 

I agree, if you can guarantee there will be no corruption then there would be no need. But are you prepared to believe that scratch on your backup DVD won't affect things, or that you won't ever accidentally do a defrag or file copy on your external drive..... ?

 

As I have mentioned backing up to the secure zone which is no way affected by windows, these problems should not be there.

 

Well, I have an internal second hard drive which is used to take backups only and secure zone is created on this drive. I have incremental backups scheduled to run 5 days a week and a full backup once a week.
The way you mention archives are verified, which would take lesser time- many incrementals with lesser full backups or a daily full backup?
I would also like to know how differential backups are verified.
What would be the best option taking the least amount of time for verifying?

 

Hi scaa,

Although very rare, the odd hard drive sector can become "bad" at any time due to a head crash caused by physical shock, excessive vibration or power surges/electrical spikes etc. Now, if one of those bad sectors occurred within the full image file I would want to know about it before starting a restore from my latest incremental!! Wouldn't you?

Regards

 

Hi menoracam,
I am totally a non technical person and going by the way you interact in this forum, you seem to be quite knowledgeable in these matters. My only concern is the abnormally high time taken to verify the archives. There should be some way of reducing the same.

 

Hello scaa,

First of all, please note that the full image along with all it's subsequent incremental images as well as the full image along with any of it's differential images are the parts of the entire multivolume image archive. Acronis True Image recognizes them as the entire image. Thus it does not matter what file\part\volume of the image archive you have selected - Check Image tool verifies the whole image anyway.

As for the long image verification time. Please let me know how much time does it actually take (not estimated time, but actual) to verify the similar image archive that resides in any other place than Acronis Secure Zone? I mean any ordinary folder or partition on your hard drive. Please note that you can not copy image from Acronis Secure Zone, so you will need to create a new image in order to perform this test.

Thank you.
--
Alexey Popov