Corrupt File Problem in TI Home 9

Discussion in 'Acronis True Image Product Line' started by LeslieT, Dec 5, 2006.

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

    LeslieT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    I am running TrueImage Home 9 (with the latest build) on a 2.64 AMD chip with XP Pro SP2. I don't have SATA drives enabled. Despite the fact that I have diligently verified the backup image after backup, when I later try to perform an incremental backup I get an error message that the backup file is corrupted. When I re-run validation, by the time 3 minutes has passed I get the corrupt file designation again.

    I bought the product on 9/20/06 and initially it appeared to work. What on earth do I have to do to get it to backup my data? I threw out Retrospect when it failed to backup anything. I'd also like to delete all the corrupt backups, but can't find a way to do it.
    LeslieT
     
  2. Volatile

    Volatile Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Posts:
    16
    Open My Computer and right click the drive your backups are located on. Click on properties and at the bottom you will see "Compress drive to save disk space". Make sure this option is not checked. If it is... uncheck it and exit/save changes. Attempt to do what you were trying before to see if it works.

    If not: you should know the location of your image file as you specified the destination. Navigate to that location through explorer and manually delete the file. Make sure you don't have any permission issues.
     
  3. Xpilot

    Xpilot Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2005
    Posts:
    2,318
    Some questions to help to identify exactly where the problem is.
    Where are you storing your backup archives?
    Guessing that it is a hard drive have you run CHKDSK R on it?
    Reading my crystal ball says that you are using a secure zone for your images. If this is so CHKDSK cannot be run on that partition The drive's own diagnostic software can examine this and give a clean bill of health. Old images will be discarded on the Fifo principle so there is no need to attempt to delete them.
    Another area which can cause problems is RAM that cannot perform without fault. Consider running Mem test overnight to confirm it's integrity.

    Xpilot
     
  4. foghorne

    foghorne Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,389
    Location:
    Leeds, Great Britain
    This may be useful to see if the compression process is related to the problem, but disk compression (or tib compression) are not likely candidates for causing validation problems. Defective RAM however may be.


    F.
     
  5. LeslieT

    LeslieT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    Volatile: I am not using compression on my computer.
    XPilot: I am using the secure partition for my archive. I have run CHKDSK and everything's fine.

    Both: I went into the partition (in TI) and tried to delete the corrupt files. Only a few would delete; on others, my attempts were rebuffed by the program.

    I noticed that my failed attempts to backup were saved and I believe these need deleting, but the program won't let me. I'll try next through Explorer. This problem first began a couple of weeks ago when I discovered that my automatic backups (when computer was turned off) were hanging up Windows at the point when "corruption" occurred. I turned off that option, found I couldn't do any incremental backups and then did a complete backup. Now it seems I can't back up to it.

    With respect to the MEM command: I got out an old DOS manual, but am unsure about the proper switches to use for run it overnight (or long enough to test adequately). I have 2 GB of RAM in 4 512 MB units. New memory was allegedly put in last May.
    LeslieT
     
  6. Xpilot

    Xpilot Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2005
    Posts:
    2,318
    If you ran CHKDSK on the drive (Your only drive?) that contains the secure zone this would have been ignored by CHKDSK . This is because the zone is hidden from most normal Windows operations and as it does not have a drive letter,by design, CHKDSK will not examine it.

    Your best bet to clear out the corrupt files is to open TI and remove the secure zone using the manage secure zone wizard. Make sure to allocate the freed space back to existing partition/s. You will then be able to run
    CHKDSK /R on the whole of your drive/s with nothing left out.
    This will mean a reboot and you will be able to see the results in the Windows event viewer sub heading applications item Logon. If you find no problems you can then recreate the secure zone if you wish and start again.

    Mem test is a free downloadable program for testing RAM. There are many references to it in these columns as to which version and how to use it. Age or youth does not really indicate the integrity or otherwise of RAM.

    Xpilot
     
  7. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    No, not the DOS MEM command, it displays used and free memory and probably is invalid on an XP system.

    You want to run a memory diagnostic program like Memtest86+ available free from www.memtest.org. I believe the version is 1.65. Let it run a long time such as overnight for increased confidence.
     
  8. bodgy

    bodgy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Posts:
    2,387
    Location:
    Qld.
    Have you recently applied any MS updates, or installed any new progams?

    Colin
     
  9. LeslieT

    LeslieT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    I have a drive letter for the secure partition and that's what CHKDSK allegedly spent two forevers checking. It's possible that because I use PartitionMagic to create logical drives that this is why I see the drive. When I installed TI, I set up the archive drive in a separate, existing partition.

    I turned on an external Seagate hard drive and did a complete system backup on it; when TI verified the backup, it stated everything was okay. We'll see when I try to run an incremental backup later.

    I went into Explorer (where the secure partition is clearly shown) and deleted all previous backup files. I'm going to backup to this partition and see if I can do an incremental backup later (maybe tomorrow as it's getting late here). It's possible that some little freaky thing happened previously which messed up subsequent attempts. The fact that TI saves corrupted files is not helpful in this (acting as if everything was fine).
    LeslieT
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2006
  10. bodgy

    bodgy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Posts:
    2,387
    Location:
    Qld.
    Are the 'faulty' backup files about the right size? It might be that they actually aren't corrupted - have you tried accessing them via the rescue CD?

    Colin
     
  11. LeslieT

    LeslieT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    Gosh, Bodgy, just the usual MS patches (minus Explorer 7 which I tried and absolutely hated). But, you've raised a good point. Of course, anti-virus (Avast), anti-spam (Cloudmark) and anti-spyware (Spy Sweeper) update all the time automatically.
    LeslieT
     
  12. Xpilot

    Xpilot Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2005
    Posts:
    2,318
    I have mis-understood what you meant by a secure partition. I assumed wrongly that you had created an Acronis secure zone and based my suggestions on this premise.
    Whatever you have created for you archives it does not have the attributes of an Acronis secure zone.

    Xpilot
     
  13. LeslieT

    LeslieT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    Yes, I have a secure zone. It's within a PartitionMagic logical drive.

    Can you explain this: my full backup on the Seagate drive fit in one single *.tib file. When I completed a complete backup in the Secure Zone a little while ago, there were five separate volumes created. I don't understand this at all. I verified the first one. Is it usual for TI to create five volumes in the secure zone for only one complete backup?

    Or, do I have something really wonky going on in this partition? I can always do as one of you suggested: wipe out the secure zone, but I'll want to reinstall it in the same partition (the logical place to put it). I have room in the programs partition, but hate to fill up that area. My drive is broken up into four logical partitions for convenience (and also because periodically one needs to perform a clean install of Windows): OS, Programs, Data, and Images.
    LeslieT
     
  14. Xpilot

    Xpilot Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2005
    Posts:
    2,318
    Yes you have something very wonky going on with the partition that you call a secure zone. It cannot be be an Acronis secure zone created by the manage secure zone wizard. It has none of the attributes that apply to a proper secure zone.
    Just a few examples :- It should not be visible to Windows explorer but yours is. It will be visible in Widows disk management and is designated Acronis SZ (partition unknown) my understanding is that yours has a drive letter. Even though a secure zone is automatically formatted in FAT32 each archive,regardless of size, is shown as a single entity with no name but the date and time of creation. Yours is apparently shown as being split into 4GB chunks.

    So as I said earlier you do not have a proper Acronis secure zone on your system. Why you found it necessary to invoke Partition Magic in its set up is beyond me as that was entirely unnecessary and it has probably had a hand in creating the mongrel zone that you do have.

    I see no great value in you having a secure zone on the drive that you are protecting in any case. Likewise it is pointless and introduces other problems if you had a SZ on your external drive. IHMO the most useful and effective place for a SZ is on a second internal hard drive. That is where I have mine and it works like a charm.
    BTW your Seagate drive is using NTFS and your erzatz secure zone is using FAT 32.

    Xpilot
     
  15. LeslieT

    LeslieT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    XPilot: I created the partition BEFORE I installed the Secure Zone into it. Acronis reformatted into the partition into FAT. All I did was tell Acronis to put the secure zone in this particular location on my hard drive. The reason I see the partition at all is because PM assigned a drive letter and allowed me to label this logical drive as secure zone. I never want anything as important as my backup on the logical drive where my OS resides . . . . not as long as I'm running Windows!

    I do NOT use the Seagate as the secure zone location and have not set it up as such. I don't have the drive turned on all the time because my computer will not start properly from a cold start if this drive is turned on (it will from a restart). I've worked on this problem but there is no resolution and I'm not going to waste any more time fiddling with it. Therefore, it is not a suitable location for a backup on which I might have to rely should there be a serious problem during boot up.

    I do not have a second internal hard drive and have no interest in obtaining/installing one.

    Acronis says that each of the five backups it created yesterday are okay and each is exactly the same size: 17.6 GB. That leaves me with the issue of WHY. I haven't tried to do an incremental backup because, so far, I haven't made any changes anywhere on my computer. I will do so as soon as I post this message.
    LeslieT
     
  16. Xpilot

    Xpilot Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2005
    Posts:
    2,318
    I am also pleased not to waste any more of my time on your "secure zone" incremental backup problems.
    I only feel qualified to advise on the use of a secure zone when it is created and used in the standard Acronis way. What you have got is beyond my experience and is not actually an Acronis secure zone.

    Xpilot
     
  17. foghorne

    foghorne Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,389
    Location:
    Leeds, Great Britain
    I'm sorry to say that you are deluding yourself if you think you doing a proper job of protecting your 'important' backup data if you are storing it on the same physical drive as your source data. Should your drive crash and burn you will lose both source and backup.

    Then I conclude you have no interest in protecting your data. I'm not really sure how you can be helped.

    F.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.