Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

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

  1. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia

    Hi, FlashBack is backwards cmpatible with *.axd files created by v1. You can use a boot usb with v2 to restore the system. However, we recommend rescue media using v1 if you're restoring v1 backups. Risk is low on both scenarios.
     
  2. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    Hi Pete,

    Please copy this with logs to iurie@realcopy.com and info@ax64.com. We'll look into the anomaly.

    Thanks!

     
  3. rodneym

    rodneym Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Posts:
    271
    Their not shouting, just trying to raise attention to the name...



     
  4. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    Thanks Rodneym for your comment (and your testing). @timmy We simply found the styling consensus preferred it that way. And we agree, we like it.

    In written paragraphs, we prefer it to be officially as FlashBack.

    Cheers!
     
  5. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,976
    Hi Wajamus,
    I know, but the problem is what happens when/if it failed to detect the anomaly and especially if the anomaly of the tracking file, is on the real partition, when it performs the restore?
    What measures have you implemented to verify that the tacking really reflects all the changes on the disk? e.g. one boots outside the OS and modifies/deletes/adds some files, then he performs a hot/warm restore. How flashback handles this situation?

    Panagiotis
     
  6. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590

    Lost logs on last restore. I will test again and see if it reproduces.
     
  7. timmy

    timmy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Posts:
    140
    Well, yes. Already stated it is an attention getter. And is not UCS the same thing? Pls consider, if every one calls Hey look at me! (which is now the trend) the effect may have a flashback, ie reverse of the desired attention. Just trying to help out these guys with sincere suggestion maybe they tone it down, let the product do its own shouting.
     
  8. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Names are always a challenge, and a lot depends on the market you are trying to get into.

    Among IT professionals, the name StorageCraft Shadow Protect has meaning. Many of them know the product. Asked about Shadowprotect home users might think it's a flashlight. Same is true of Raxco. So assuming Flashback's market is home users they now have two hurdles to cross. First home users are clueless about the need for backup no less the products. So what does the name Xeroweight Flashback tell them the product is, whether you shout it or not. This is a challenge. I know about name recognition, as I have seen the effect with my business.
     
  9. timmy

    timmy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Posts:
    140
    Well,yes understood. But pls consider...
    NVIDIA
    SHIELD
    ASUS
    AOMEI
    FORD (even head of PR did not know Ford was a man's name)
    FOX (ditto, Fox)
    ...and a thousand others, all wanting to stand out somehow.
    But if everybody gets priority attention, then nobody does.
    Why not just write everything ALL BIG LETTERS and be done with it.
    Variant: Multiple exclamation marks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (just one no longer works)
     
  10. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Your right everyone is doing it. And since all caps is considered shouting and rude, it might be smarter to drop the caps and stand out that way.
     
  11. rodneym

    rodneym Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Posts:
    271
    Yes I second this, in fact I think we should make it a crime for keyboard manf. to put the Cap Lock feature on the board.



     
  12. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Note to everyone including myself. I think we've beat the all caps thing to death. Only one opinion really matters. So lets get back to the software.

    Thanks,

    Pete
     
  13. manolito

    manolito Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Posts:
    407
    This was under Win7 64bit. Now I wiped my HDD and installed Win7 32bit, and voilà, the native hot restore suddenly worked. Approximately the same speed as Macrium, and it was totally reliable so far.

    And no, I still refuse to send my logs to the company, way too much personal information which gets sent...



    Cheers
    manolito
     
  14. timmy

    timmy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Posts:
    140
    Is anyone else besides your servt having this issue with the build 693? The pre-boot screen that you can enable, it asks you to state which folder contains the files to be restored. But when click on that folder, nothing happens? Making the pre-boot option unusable. Did not have this difficulty with the prev build, I think named 655. The pre-boot worked just fine. Thanks any info.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2015
  15. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Well I retested on the issue I posted about above, and it didn't repeat so from that perspective all is well.

    But Flashback isn't going to work for me, as I use 2 other imagining programs and I like to test restore, every restore of another program means a full image of Flashback. This totally negates it's value to me. Sigh.
     
  16. bgoodman4

    bgoodman4 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    Posts:
    3,237
    Technically its not a new full image but a healing of the tracking file. It takes the same amount of time as a full image but not the space.

    Peter, you might want to try a test. It occurs to me that if you are not going back before the FB snap with your restore test then FB may not need to do the healing run. I think it likely the case that the tracking file is not watching every click and keystroke as they happen. More likely FB compares (tracks) differences between FB snaps. If this is the case a test restore with other software that is done after the last FB snap may not trigger the healing process.

    Just thought I would mention that I most often use FB to do my restores and MR6 if there is an issue with a failed FB restore. This means that I very rarely get an opportunity to use MR6 unless its on a whim. Today was one of those whims and the MR6 restore took 43 min to go from the current state to the latest snap. Better than the 1.5 hours that a full restore would have taken but way worse than FBs typical 3 min. I did notice that most of the time MR6 was looking for changes not rolling changes back,,,,,,,,In fairness to MR6 the time frame between current state and the latest snap was aprox 13 hours whereas the typical FB restore is from current state to last snap (max an hour ago). Probably if MR6 was set to take snaps hourly rather than daily this time frame to restore would be more in line between the two programs.
     
  17. smith2006

    smith2006 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Posts:
    808
    "Automatic" doesn't seem to work here (.693 Beta).

    I have tried uninstall & reinstall, but still failed to make it work.

    Found this entry in the log.

    Thank you.
     
  18. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,164
    Location:
    UK / Pakistan
    Tracking file is used by v1 or v2?
     
  19. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,944
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Smith2006... as the Devs have mentioned before, you should gather your logs (Backup Tools/About Flashback/Collect Logs, or <right-click> its SystemTray icon and select "Collect Logs") and send them to <info@ax64.com> with problem description for quicker attention to your issue.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2015
  20. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,944
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    It has been in use since the inception of the product (all versions).
    Both Macrium Reflect and FlashBack use a "tracking mechanism" albeit they are very different. FlashBack tracks every change to the surface of the disk via the special driver it installs with the product. This driver intercepts (watches) all the disk surface Input-Output that happens dynamically and records it to its tracking file. In that sense, it is dynamically changing its reference in close to REAL TIME.

    Reflect, basically, uses the personal tracking file of Windows (its FileSystem mgmt files) to do its bidding. From this you can see that anything legitimately done to the Windows FileSystem (under Live Windows, under external Windows <WinPE>, even under LINUX using known Windows FileSystem access methods) will be recorded as required in that FileSystem management area. With Flashback, its driver must be actively loaded and running for it to do the exact same thing that Windows does (although in a different way). Based on this, Flashback's FileSystem difference management has the same Achilles' heal as Rollback RX has BUT... Flashback has the ability to see that legitimate FileSystem changes (not DATA specific changes) have been made outside of Windows and will attempt to repair its tracking mechanism upon the next image or restore operation... Rollback cannot do this. That repair procedure will cause, most likely, a complete system restoration during a RESTORE operation or a full scan of the FileSystem upon a snapshot operation. The snapshot will be long in time (full scan required) but should only include the real changes that have occurred since the last legitimate operation.

    As I mentioned in the beginning of this response, both Reflect and Flashback track FileSystem differences... just in very different ways. Reflect allows Windows to be the "recorder" of changes... a very safe and fully supported way of doing business when dealing with a Windows system.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2015
  21. taotoo

    taotoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Posts:
    459
    Not wanting to stray off topic too much, but does it compare the MFT of the live system with the MFT in the backup? If so, is it susceptible to problems if the live system MFT doesn't quite reflect the rest of the live system disk's contents, or does NTFS account for this sort of thing and correct itself (I'm thinking of the various errors that a CHKDSK can show up and then correct)?
     
  22. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,944
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Among other things, yes. If NTFS didn't do this (heal the system) very well then Windows itself wouldn't work very well.

    Reflect takes one additional step prior to its imaging process and runs its own FileSystem check (Defaults/Backup/Verify File System... not as extensive as a full ChkDsk but done fairly well) prior to the imaging operation. If it finds an anomaly, it won't do the imaging operation and will inform the user of such.

    We should chat under the Macrium Relect thread if you have additional specific Reflect questions... after all, this is the FlashBack thread :cautious:
     
  23. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    @bgoodman4

    Hi Barry and all

    The tracking file issue is not unique to Flashback. Shadowprotect's continuous incrementals have the same issue, and it's a champ providing you don't do anything to disturb it.

    But now I use 3 imaging programs, Macrium, SP's IT edition, and IFW. And I like to test the images frequently. And Barry I've already tried your test, and others to see if I could figure out a solution, but no deal. Plus Macrium is much faster for me. My C; drive has 140gb on it. When I was playing and realized the FB native restore was going to take the full time, I hit the power reset. System still had boot manager so I booted to the MR RE. C: drive partition was gone, but no sweat, The MR restore took 3 minutes and restore was perfect.

    Also with no other images involved if I take a FB incremental and all is stable, but enter Shadowmode with Shadow Defender, when I exit Shadowmode, that also "breaks" the tracking file. I think FB is working, but for my approach, I just don't see the time advantage, and that is the only advantage I'd get.
     
  24. taotoo

    taotoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Posts:
    459
    Thanks - very informative.
     
  25. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,976
    I have not tested it for a long time (almost a year) but last time I did, it did not compare the mft's. If I remember correctly, checks the timestamps of the mft and the tracking file of the live system and if they much it performs a fast restore... if not it it performs a full restore. It's fast restoration is based on the tracking file and not on the mft.

    Panagiotis
     
  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.