Image Verify is Good, But Restore Fails

Discussion in 'Acronis True Image Product Line' started by Boofer, Dec 6, 2006.

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

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    I have three images that I have tried to restore. A 1GB image restores fine. So does a 52GB image. However, a 152GB image fails halfway through, saying that the image is corrupted. The images were all verified when they were created. They were created under Windows.

    Here's something that troubles me: the 152GB image verifies good when Acronis runs under Windows XP, but fails to verify under the Acronis Recovery CD. How can this be? o_O

    I can run Acronis and "explore image" on the 152GB image. It looks intact. Why can't I then restore it? o_O :'(

    I'm using Acronis True Image 8.0.

    Boofer
     
  2. bVolk

    bVolk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Posts:
    954
    Boofer,

    If your images are stored on an USB external drive it may be that the enclosure's chipset does not handle large files well. Add a less then perfect match with the Linux driver from the Rescue CD and there you are. Could also be your motherboard.

    Did you try to set the Options to split the image on creation? I would say a 152 GB image is far too large to be safe without splitting.
     
  3. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    The image I'm trying to create is from my 500GB RAID 0 system drive. The backup USB drive is a 500GB. The ABIT AV8 motherboard is 2 years old.

    You mention a few things that seem to need some clarification for me:
    • A less-than-perfect match with Linux driver from thew Rescue CD...this is a problem, I guess?
    • Where does Acronis's documentation say that image size should be limited to...?

    It would seem that there is an image size limitation since I was successful with my smaller file sizes. Might be interesting to know what the maximum image size can be. If true, it's rather ridiculous given the coming explosion of data storage requirements (videos, pictures, mp3, huge programs & games).

    I have split other image files. The 52GB image was split into 13 DVD-writable chunks of 4.4GB.

    Since I was relying on the successful restoration of my 152GB image, I am very disappointed that I could not complete the simple task for which I purchased and trusted the Acronis True Image backup software. Perhaps I will be taking a harder look at Norton Ghost as a RELIABLE backup strategy.

    Boofer
     
  4. bVolk

    bVolk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Posts:
    954
    Boofer,

    The lack of compatibility of the Linux drivers with some USB external drives' chipsets appeared more often in the past (say one year ago), with today's chipsets it's much less frequent.

    I don't think the User's Guide says anything about file size as it's not a general problem or a limit imposed by design. With a different motherboard or external HD enclosure that might work. With another combination of the two, problems may arise even in Windows. USB external drives in general still seem to be less reliable than internally mounted drives. I had to ditch one USB HD enclosure (purchased almost three years ago, that's true) that wouldn't show up in My Computer (!!) if the planets weren't right. And it was picky about the USB port it was plugged into, preferring the rear ports. None of my other USB devices ever complained. The first advice new users of TI get on this forum is to verify that their external is seen after booting from the Rescue CD.

    I'd suggest you browse through this forum to get a better picture on the subject. You will learn that TI doesn't work on just every setup that exists, but also that many current users of TI have already experienced Ghost and are not planning to go back.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2006
  5. jmk94903

    jmk94903 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    3,329
    Location:
    San Rafael, CA
    It may be ridiculous, but the hardware you are using is where the limitation is. Some hardware handles big files better than others. Also, the Linux drivers that are available are usually not as good as the Windows drivers, so that can mean the Recovery CD doesn't work as well as the Windows version of TI with big files. You have proven that for your system.

    As pointed out, the workaround for this hardware/driver limitation is to split the file into smaller pieces. You have found that DVD size pieces are handled correctly. That's a lot of pieces for a 152GB backup, but it may be necessary. You might test and find that 10GB or 20GB pieces always result in restorable backups with the Recovery CD, but is it worth the effort. Personally, I'd just always split the backup at 4.4GB.

    Another option is to use Firewire instead of USB external drives for backup. Firewire is faster in practice than USB 2, and has better error checking.
     
  6. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    Thanks for the astute replies.

    I saw a posting by jstevemd, "re: raid 0 and true image 8 & server".

    The RAID 0 and TI8's inability to handle it looks to be a significant part of my problem.

    I will try to implement a firewire configuration along with smaller data chunks for future backups, but do I really have any recourse for completing the restore of my 152GB image now?

    Another route I feel confident will give me good results is to make the 500GB USB drive into a hot swap drive...have my cake and eat it too. ;)

    Boofer
     
  7. jmk94903

    jmk94903 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    3,329
    Location:
    San Rafael, CA
    Is this an image of a boot drive or a data drive? If it's a data drive, you can try restoring it under Windows where the image verifies correctly. Even if it's a boot drive, you might restore it under Windows and then switch it into the boot drive bay. You might have to tweak the boot.ini before it boots, but that's doable.
     
  8. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    The two 250GB drives (RAID 0) comprise my bootable system disk. The image verified under Windows, but failed halfway through the restore which makes me tend to believe the RAID configuration is the culprit.

    At the time I spec'd the RAID 0 system two years ago it was the only way to attain a 500GB system drive. At this point in time I can purchase a 500GB Seagate drive. Granted, it isn't SATA, but maybe for the sake of having reliable backups I can live with that sacrifice in access speed. :doubt:

    Thanks for your steerage.

    Boofer
     
  9. bobmitch

    bobmitch Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Posts:
    117
    Location:
    Texas
    Boofer

    Don't know if this is any help to you. I downloaded the True Image 10 trial and backed up my system. I have two WD 74 GB 10,000rpm Raptors in Raid O. Backed up in Windows and verified there. Then, booted into the recovery CD that I created and checked the image again...again...passed. Now, granted...I haven't wiped the drives and tried to restore...not sure I even want to go there...for fear of corruption, even though the image passed twice. The odd part is that the TI recovery disk does NOT see my two DVD drives at all...which means I can never back up to DVD...with external HDD...don't know that I would...but the option is gone...My system image is about 50 GB large. Not sure it's your raid configuration...try v10 and see if anything changes...

    Bob
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2006
  10. bVolk

    bVolk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Posts:
    954
    Boofer,

    I may be stating the obvious, but maybe not.

    When an image file is split into chunks (volumes, by TI) and you want to validate, mount or restore the image, you select any single file from the set comprising the image - one only. TI will know that they belong toghether and will processes the whole set without any further operator intervention.

    That considered, the necessity to have large image files split up turns into a minor issue.

    In the instance that you validated the 13 files comprising the 52 GB image one by one, you in fact validated the whole image 13 times over. We have seen this done, even in restore.
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2006
  11. foghorne

    foghorne Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,389
    Location:
    Leeds, Great Britain
    A fundamental element of good practice when using True Image is to ensure that images created from Windows, not only validate OK from Windows, but also from the Rescue Disk. The reason is simply that you will always need the Linux Rescue Disk (or boot strap Linux environment) to do a restore onto the primary partition.

    This doesn't help you now - but I reckon BartPE most likely will.

    F.
     
  12. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    The 52GB image was validated by starting with the first file and letting it proceed through until completion. I'm not sure how you could validate each one in turn. At any rate, I didn't do that.

    Boofer
     
  13. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA

    Let me start with "BartPE". What or who is that?

    Do we equate the Acronis TI Rescue Media with the Linux Rescue Disk?

    Let's compare notes: I think it has been mentioned in these forums that the RAID drivers for the Rescue environment are not up to snuff, so any chance at reliably validating a RAID image in that environment is essentially nil. Windows, however, offers the best chance for successful validation because valid RAID drivers do exist. Is that about right?

    Would it be fair to say that the Acronis True Image backup software is designed for non-RAID drive systems?

    The time required to validate my 152GB image on an Athlon 64 FX-55 2.6GHz 2GB DDR-SDRAM system is around 8 hours, running nothing else. When a validation begins under Windows and successfully negotiates the first 3-4 hours only to fail, it's a little frustrating. This is after the successful validation under Windows in the same commensurate timeframe.

    Boofer
     
  14. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    Thanks, I'll try TI10 to see if that makes any difference.

    Boofer
     
  15. foghorne

    foghorne Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,389
    Location:
    Leeds, Great Britain
    This is a Windows CD boot environment. So if you can access something from Windows - you can access it from Bart PE (as a general rule). The Windows CD Boot environment is an alternative to the Linux Rescue Disk, and can be preferred when the Linux drivers are not sufficiently up to date. The key point here is that the drivers with the Linux boot are frozen with the build of ATI and can only be added to by Acronis. With Bart PE you can add your own drivers. Note that BartPE has nothing to do with Acronis, though they do supply a form of ATI which can be 'plugged in' to BartPE.

    See this post (which was in the context of V9, but it still applies to V10)
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=839781&postcount=1
    and also
    http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/)

    Yes

    RAID modes are not explicitly excluded in the Home version but they are mentioned as being included in the Workstation version.

    F.
     
  16. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    AFAIK, Raid is supported in the Home version.

    Try the validation using the Linux recovery CD. This is the version that has to run if you are restoring an active partition or an image containing an active partition. This environment may be lacking in a good driver for your system. TI8 may be out-of-date as far as its recovery CD version goes. BartPE would likely fix this.

    Remember that the validation is NOT comparing image contents with source disk contents. It is computing a checksum and comparing it with one stored in the archive when it was created. Nontheless, it has to be able to read the archive properly and the PC has to perform flawlessly to arrive at the desired checksum.

    Run chkdsk X: /r on all your partitions if you haven't done so. If TI gets some strange disk data it could upset how it tries to put things back. TI does not put every sector's contents back into the sector it came from. IE, sector abcd's data may not end up in sector abcd on a restore.
     
  17. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    Hallelujah!

    Boy, life is difficult when you're ignorant. I was ignorant of the existence of something called BartPE (or UBCD4Win). AFAIK TI8 did not have it. I was going along blindly expecting that version to do what I needed to get done.

    I upgraded to TI10, created a BartPE recovery disk with my VIA SATA RAID drivers from the Abit website, and was able to restore (with validation) my troublesome 152GB image with no problem and within about 4 hours. BartPE and the gurus on this forum have restored my faith in True Image and reliability of my backup strategy.

    I know it has been posed in these forums, but would it be so hard for a company to make an effort to support its product? Over the years I've seen it before with other products, hardware and software, where the end user base effectively provides the support and maintenance of a product.

    My gratitude to the many on this forum who give of their time and talent to correct the product shortcomings and make it easier for grunts like me to go about my computing business.

    Thanks,
    Boofer
     
  18. bobmitch

    bobmitch Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Posts:
    117
    Location:
    Texas
    So I guess my next question since I am a TI novice...is a Raid 0 configuration only recognized with BartPE? Or is one able to restore a raid 0 from the TI 10 boot disk? I am getting more confused....

    Also...where do I find BartPE?

    Thanks

    Bob
     
  19. MudCrab

    MudCrab Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2006
    Posts:
    6,483
    Location:
    California
    It depends on the comptuer's hardware. If your raid array shows up as a single drive when you boot from the rescue cd, then it probably will work.

    On my ASUS P5B-Deluxe computer, the raid array does not show up from the rescue cd in "full" mode, but does show up correctly in "safe" mode.

    You may not need to create a BartPE boot cd. If you do, it can be found here. There is also lots of info on creating and using a BartPE cd on this forum. Just search for BartPE.
     
  20. dbknox

    dbknox Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Posts:
    511
    Location:
    Canada
    See foghorne post ( post #15 ) links supplied by him there.
     
  21. bobmitch

    bobmitch Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Posts:
    117
    Location:
    Texas
    Good news and bad news!

    Good News: The TI 10 boot CD recognizes my Raid 0 array as 138 gb (two WD 74 GB Raptors in Raid 0)...and recognizes my External HDD fine as drive D:

    Bad news: The TI boot CD does not recognize my two DVD burners. Otherwise...D:, E: and then my external would be F: as it is in Windows.

    So...if I always back up to External HDD...I should be OK. Should I ever want to back up to DVD...won't work...

    Bob
     
  22. Boofer

    Boofer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Port Hueneme, CA
    I too am a noob of sorts. After I had my BartPE Restore CD built (which was a little confusing from what I had read here) and had upgraded from TI8 to TI10, I still couldn't see my RAID 0 drives. BartPE permitted me to add the drivers necessary. Once that was done, all drives are visible. You might try creating a BartPE and plugging in your drivers for the two DVD burners. IDE? SCSI? SATA?

    Using a CD/RW disc allowed me to reburn the BartPE until I got it right. The option to erase the disc is built into BartPE.

    Boofer
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.