Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by Isso, Jan 18, 2013.

  1. rodneym

    rodneym Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Posts:
    271
    Lets start a revolution...lol

    MAYBE some developer will say, "You know this is what people really want, and I could make a fortune, IF I make a good product...

    We can only hope...




     
  2. rodneym

    rodneym Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Posts:
    271
    I agree. I got the same error... Maybe we don't want the current developers to work on version 1....Maybe the old developers could do it (the original guys)... I mean apperently NO ONE wants to make something that is any different than what EVERYONE else is making...


     
  3. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    If you could read thru the whole thread, you'd realize that isn't going to happen. Period.
     
  4. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    Hi @manolito @rodneym!

    Could you please e-mail info@ax64.com and iurie@realcopy.com, even if you have already, with this report and your FlashBack logs? Thank you.

    In regards to working on v1 - that is in essence what we've always been doing.

    We've gone through phases of improving hot restore, finding it to still be a flawed in implementation. We then moved to warm restore, which is very reliable and fast (restores <4 minutes). We can see users missed Windows hot restore, so we put our efforts into building native hot restore, which is what we're are testing together now. As reports show, it's really fast and comparable to MR 6 or faster.

    Thanks and keep those reports coming through to our support mail. It goes a long way.

    Waj

     
  5. Kit1cat

    Kit1cat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Posts:
    148
    Location:
    Plymouth, UK
    Waj, I have emailed requesting link for latest beta, but no reply?
     
  6. cloggy49

    cloggy49 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2015
    Posts:
    90
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @wajamus

    I assume that V2 (or Flashback when the new beta version becomes available that does an hourly incremental backup) can read the .axd files created by V1. So, what are the risks of using V1 for the regular daily incremental backups and in case a restore with V1 fails, I can still use a boot USB with V2 to restore the system? Note that restore speed is not so important for me.
    Also note that both PC's do not change from a hardware/configuration point of view. The 'MBR" and the UEFI system will remain like that.
     
  7. rodneym

    rodneym Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Posts:
    271
    Seems risky to me....

    Here is what I do...

    Install Win10, plus all fav must have software...
    ]
    THEN the last thing I install is AX64TM V1....

    Now direct it to BU C: and then browse to the folder in D: (or whatever) where your backups will be stored.

    Now I make the first BU with AX64TM V1, then install any free piece of software... "ANYTHING" ...

    NOW make your first incremental BU.... I just do this to test that I can go back to the first BU made by AX64TM V1

    NOW once I know I can go back and forth between these 2 backups...

    Then I BU my C: drive with Acronis or Macrium (or whatever)... This is now my base...

    NOW AX64TM V1 works forever...


     
  8. cloggy49

    cloggy49 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2015
    Posts:
    90
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    As the scheduler of Flashback is broken and the hourly incrementals do not run, does anybody know if there is a command line option to start Flashback every hour by Task Scheduler to force it to make the hourly incrementals?
     
  9. cloggy49

    cloggy49 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2015
    Posts:
    90
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Don't worry, I'm still having Macrium Reflect Free edition running too.... :)
     
  10. taotoo

    taotoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Posts:
    452
    I think the Server version has a command line option, so presume that the regular version doesn't.
     
  11. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,377
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    I have found that to be true. The archive format has not changed since early in the v1 ALPHA cycle.
    Risks with v1 have been discussed ad infinitum in this thread... if you need to know, just sit back and read a while :eek:

    My experience has shown that the imaging aspect of v1 has always been solid (and quick), it's only the HOT restore and limited partition management capability that has created the issues experienced by those seeing them. Since the imaging aspect of v2 hasn't changed much except for additional partition mgmt functions, its speed will be similar to v1.

    Wanting to use v1 and saying "Note that restore speed is not so important for me" doesn't make too much sense to me at all... why not just use v2 (assuming it's working for you)? Anyway, when I have mixed COLD restorations between v1 and v2 (in either direction) it has always worked just fine. Just be careful... it's not an advertised supported feature, test diligently.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2015
  12. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,377
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    See your PMs...
     
  13. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Couldn't resist playing with 693 last so gave it another whirl, this time trying to avoid any conflicts. Saw something very strange.

    On my first restore, I carefully checked the Hot restore button, Clicked Recover now. Then the 6 second count down. I ignored the still present Recover now button. Hot restore went off without a hitch and was very fast.

    Next restore, I carefully made sure hot restore was on, and clicked Recover now. But this time, I clicked that 2nd Recover Now button. System went to the hot restore console and restore started, but it became clear, It was doing a full restore. I aborted with a power reset, and booted to the Flashback RE. The restore ended up being a full image restore here also, but it did work. By the way the full restore for all imaging programs on my machine right now is about 17 minutes, and this was in line with that.

    A bit later I went back and tried a 3rd restore, again checking Hot Restore, and only clicking the first Recover Now button. Surprisingly again went to the Native console, but again it quickly became apparent, that a full image restore was happening. Again aborted with a power reset, only this time I booted to the Macrium V6 RE. Restored in 3 minutes.

    Any ideas.

    Pete
     
  14. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,377
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    P... I will try and duplicate and return with results.
     
  15. Stode

    Stode Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Posts:
    377
    Location:
    Finland
    It's pointless in trying tro explain something like this to a person like rodneym, whom doesn't even have manners to post in a proper way, without shouting and bold characters.
    Well, I guess the mod's (hopefully) will act soon..
     
  16. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,976
    Froggie those risks still exist in V2. As long as AX64/flashback relies in a tracking file the risks will never be eliminated no matter if one performs hot/warm/cold etc. restore.
    Macrium is reliable because it compares the files table between the archive and the partition in memory.
    AX64/flashback is unreliable because it compares the tracking file between the archive and the partition. If something went wrong during the tracking the entire chain gets corrupted.

    ps. by the way can you post some screenshots of the new flashback, if it does not break the beta agreement?

    Panagiotis
     
  17. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,377
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    No broken agreement :argh:... they are exactly the same as "Time Machine" v2 (the term "Time Machine" replaced by "Flashback"). The only difference is that in the RECOVER process, the DEFAULT option is WARM (using a LOCAL BOOT of the special made Flashback WinRE) and if you select HOT (via the advanced options), behind the scenes it will look at the location of the image holding partition. If it's not something supported at the Native NT API level, it will select the WARM path above. If it is, it will invoke a restoration process at the pre-Windows point where the NT API is available (like ChkDsk, BOOT time defrags, and (God help us) the Norton very aggressive scanner).
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2015
  18. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,377
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Generally agree. Two questions to be asked here... how much more vulnerable is the use of a "Tracking File" (as far as corruption is concerned) compared to any Windows FileSystem file ($MFT, etc.)? The main issues that have been positively (publicly) identified have dealt with Lite Virtualization and BOOT time processes. The BOOT time process is clear... the Flashback required driver to manage the Tracking File is not loaded at that time so there's most likely no way to "tracK' activity at that level. This, of course, will invalidate the tracking reference.

    The LV issue is that the tracking is suspended during the LV process, and if any files changed under the LV process are preserved while coming out of it, once again, the tracking has been invalidated.

    If the user really understands these limitations (XeroWeight should document these areas clearly for its users... I don't believe it ever has), can he/she not make a command decision to determine which is more important to them... LV/BOOT time processes or a somewhat speedy snapshot-like environment? Of course Macrium REFLECT's method of detecting FileSystem changes is clearly superior, but the above question still remains.

    Flashback is vulnerable, "fer shur"... but in the hands of knowledgeable users, it can be very useful.

    No, this is NOT a sales pitch... just a technical discussion :isay:
     
  19. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    XeroWeight isn't the only one that uses the tracking file, and they all have the same weakness. If you do something that disturbs the chain tracking is broken. Shadowprotect in it's continuous Incrementals had the same issues, and would "heal" the chain, by doing a corrective process, same time as a full restore. I think(have not tested) Flashback does the same thing. But for me it totally negates any time advantage as I use 3 other imaging programs and I like to test restore images frequently. This breaks the tracking, so in essence most of my Flashback images become full images.
     
  20. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,976
    The problem is not how much vulnerable it is.
    The problem is that when the tracking breaks and AX64 missed identifying it, it will continue to create incrementals with broken file table references.
    e.g. I relly on AX64 for my backups -> tracking breaks AX64 failed to identify it -> I continue to create incrementals that are corrupted -> when I need to recover the system it does not boot and I have no way of knowing which was the last good incremental so I'll have to ditch the entire chain except the baseline.
    = it fails it's purpose of continuous backups

    And with OS like windows 10 with its forced updates it can happen anytime.

    Panagiotis
     
  21. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Hi Panagiotis

    Doesn't it take the time to go thru and heal the tracking file. I thought it did. If not that is a disaster.
     
  22. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,976
    True, but this reminded me also another problem of AX64.
    Let's say that the chain is fine but the tracking broke on the live system (no image was taken afterwords even though the user and AX64 did not realised it).
    Every attempt to perform a fast restore hot/warm will result in a broken file table of the partition and if one is lucky the system won't boot (he will be forced to perfom a full restore)... if he is unlucky the system will boot but some files will be corrupted without him realising it (and if he starts a new chain and deletes the good backup he will remain with only the corrupted files...).

    Panagiotis
     
  23. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Which might explain why, although I test, It doesn't stay on my system.
     
  24. timmy

    timmy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Posts:
    120
    Why is Flashback ALL BIG LETTERS. Do they stand for anything? Asked the same question of AOMEI.
    Trend toward uppercase shouting in product and company names is catching on wildly. Its value as an attention-getter thus great reduced, and there may even be a flashback by consumers.
     
  25. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    FlashBack indeed takes these measures, and if it detects any anomaly simply performs a full restore/full backup.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.