Restore Image to new SATA Drive

Discussion in 'Acronis True Image Product Line' started by overclockme, Feb 14, 2006.

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

    overclockme Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Posts:
    2
    I recently got a larger HD (Seagate SATA 160GB) and need to move my OS Partition and another partition on the old HD to this newer drive.

    I tried to use clone disk but if I run it from the boot disk it does not recognize any of the SATA drives in my system. (Using on board SATA with ATI SB450 Chipset on MSI482M4 MB)

    Tried to run the Disk Clone within Windows but as soon as the system reboots it scans two partitions comes back with a message that it is complete (in less than a minute) but has done nothing with the drive.

    So next I tried to use an image backup to restore the two partitions to the new drive. The system would not boot. One time I thought I had it as windows began to boot but it hung up on a logo screen for about 40 minutes not appearing to do anything (no drive light and couldnt quite tell if drive was writing or not).

    (yes to tech support - I have the latest build and tried to update the drivers)

    Some help would be appreciated on how to get this image copied over. (by the way, at this point in time, I have spent enough time, I really don't want to focus on fixing the clone thing if I can just get the image restored I would be a very happy camper. I am thinking this should be the most troublefree way to get me where I want to be.

    I have restored full disks before and they just worked but this is the first in a multi-partition and multidisk. Must be something I am not doing.

    Thank you.

    Specs:
    Windows XP
    Athlon 64 3700+ 2gb ram
    Seagate 7200.7 160GB (new drive)
    Maxtor Diamondmax 10 100GB (old Drive)
    Trueimage 8.0 build 937

    P.S. I am presuming I have to have the "C:" drive partition set as the Active Partition.
     
  2. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Posts:
    4,661
    Location:
    Menorca (Balearic Islands) Spain
    Hello overclockme,

    First of all you need to create a new image but this time make sure you tick the box next to the Disk Number rather than one or two individual partitions. Doing so will ensure that the Master Boot Record (MBR) of the source drive is included in the image. When you subsequently restore the "whole disk" image to the new drive you will, once again, need to tick the checkbox next to the Disk Number in order that the MBR is copied out of the image to the destination drive. See screenshots below.

    The only problem with restoring a "whole disk" image to a larger drive is that you will be left with an amount of unallocated space equal to the difference in size between the old and new drives. Either use suitable Partition Management software to reallocate this space to the existing partition(s) or use the workaround in this <previous post of mine>.

    Regards
     

    Attached Files:

  3. mustang

    mustang Developer

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Posts:
    905
    Hello overclockme,

    The first thing to try is fixing the MBR on your newly imaged drive. Acronis recommends a utility called XFDISK that boots from a floppy and automatically fixes the MBR. Do a search on this forum for XFDISK. Chances are good that will make your new drive bootable.

    The second thing you should do is download the BartPE plugin for TI8 from the Acronis website. They provide good instructions on how to build a BartPE disk. You are going to need this in the future as the Acronis Linux based Rescue CD does not support your SATA controller. You will not be able restore an image of your C: to the same disk if the need should arrive. When you build the BartPE disk, you will need to add the drivers for your SATA controller. This will make BartPE recognize your drives. Unfortunately, there is no way add those drivers to Acronis Rescue CD.

    A very easy way to get into BartPE is with the ReatogoXPE project. You can download it for free at http://www.reatogo.de. It has very easy to follow instructions on the website. If you like it, you can purchase a premium key for only $15. This will unlock the autoDriver function. AutoDriver will pick up all the drivers from your normal Windows system (including the SATA driver) and add them to your BartPE. This saves a lot of leaning time.

    Good luck,
    mustang
     
  4. overclockme

    overclockme Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Posts:
    2
    Thanks to both of you....

    Menorcaman - I got it up and running with your solution and just as you mentioned, I have about 60gb unallocated. I am not sure I feel adventurous enough to try to overwrite my old drive before I have the new one up and working....

    Which brings me to Mustang... Thanks I am going to try that next. Are you saying that BartPE will allow me to clone the drive? That would be ideal as the cloning process would let me resize the partition and if I understand correctly, is the way ATI is intended to be used to move up in disk size.

    Thanks for the quick answer both of you.
     
  5. mustang

    mustang Developer

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Posts:
    905
    Hello overclockme,

    Yes, the BartPE disk with the TI8 plugin will allow you to clone the drive with complete control over the partition sizes.

    BTW, I recommend you do not overclock during the cloning process.

    mustang
     
  6. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    Hi. I'm trying T.I. for the first time. I've always used Drive Image, but on this new system it's not working. So I d/l'd the trial version of T.I. I'm trying to do a full backup of the C drive to the D drive (which is a partition of the same disk as the C.) As such, I can't tick the option to choose the whole disk.

    I was able to make a verifiable backup of the entire C drive onto the D drive. (C drive is 20GB; D drive is 40GB). But when I tried to restore the C drive from the image, using the option to verify before restoring, it hung up. (I verified after creating the image, so I'm reasonably sure it's valid, but I wanted the extra assurance during the restore, since it was an available option).

    Since this is my first experience with T.I., I'm not quite sure what to make of it. This is a new computer (1 day old). XP Pro is the OS (I already grabbed all the MS Updates and validated the OS). 2 320 GB Sata HD's. The problem started when I saw that they didn't listen to my request to partition the boot disk HDD C: (20GB) D: (40GB) E: (100GB) F: (135GB). It was just one big 300GB C. So I used Drive Image to create a two-way partition C: 20GB & D: 280GB. Then I used XP disk management to create D: 40GB, E: 100GB, & F: 135GB. But then when I went to do a backup with Drive Image, it kept giving error messages about not being able to go beyond the 1034 cylinder. That's why I began looking for another image program. Maybe I just need to do a total reinstall, and partition the disk the way it should have been done at the outset. (Although I spent 10 hours tweaking, etc., and would like to avoid that if possible.)
     
  7. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Posts:
    4,661
    Location:
    Menorca (Balearic Islands) Spain
    Hello skbaltimore,

    Before you do anything drastic run chkdsk X: /r on each partition of your hard drive (substitute X with the partitition letter being tested) to test for and repair any bad sectors. After that, boot from the Acronis bootable rescue CD (you did create one didn't you? :)) and try a restore again.

    Regards
     
  8. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    I will run the chkdsk, even though the HDD's are brand new. But from what I read, the bootable rescue CD isn't an option for the trial version. And since this is the first day of the trial, I wanted to see how the regular "In Windows" part worked first, before purchasing it. There's another thread where I posted specifically how long it should take. It might be a mobo/chip conflict as well. I thought it might have to do with the high compression I chose for the first one, so I tried one with normal compression. It seemed to make the b/u a little faster (under 5 minutes) but the restore still took a while. I'll run the chkdsk and report back.
     
  9. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    The Trial Version bootable rescue CD will let you restore an image created in Windows but it will not let you create an image. This renders the disk useless when the trial period expires.
     
  10. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    Aaaah...ok, my bad; I misunderstood what was actually being said. So I am able to make a bootable rescue CD to start up the restore process from the CD, but the image I need to use to do the restore has to be one that was previously created in Windows, and I assume, then stored on a hard drive, vs. using the program to create an image on the spot from the Linux-based? boot CD. Is that it?

    Note: I've run CHKDSK on the D, E, & F partitions (D=40GB; E=100GB; F=135GB) and they all checked out perfectly. As soon as I post this, I'm going to reboot and have the C drive checked as well. (That might take a bit, so if I don't post back for a little while that will be the reason.)

    What's puzzling to me is that I could understand if the making of the image in Windows would take longer than making it outside of Windows, because of all the overhead, etc. But since the restore takes place outside of Windows in a much simpler, "cleaner" environment, it would seem that it should go much faster, now slower. But if there's some sort of incompatibility, then yeah, it would go slower. Frankly, I'm at least glad it went at all. Even at 1/2 hour, that's a LOT FASTER than a total reformat.
     
  11. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    Yes. If you have the full paid version, you can use the boot CD version to make an image if you wish and some prefer to do so since they don't trust the technolgoy that allows TI to make an image within Windows. However, the snapshot technology seems to work very well so I always backup within Windows.

    You can store your images on whatever device you wish whether or not you are using the boot CD or Windows.

    I recommend that you make the boot CD and do a restore from it as part of your evaluation. This is the disk you must use to do a restore should your drive die and you are dead in the water.
     
  12. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    Thanks. And I'm on it. ;)

    I just finished the chkdsk for all partitions on Disk0 (C, D, E, & F) & they're all A-OK. Along with the boot CD, I am going to try having the TI image on the 2nd Sata HDD (G, H, & K - all 100GB non-system partitions). I've noticed that just in copying large files, it goes faster from Disk0 to Disk1, vs. Disk0 "C" to Disk0 "E". After I've tried both of those out, I'll check back.
     
  13. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    Well, I just finished the combination of the CD restore in conjunction with using the image file from Disk1, and it worked, with a total restore time of 28 minutes. That's at least 5-6 times slower than the way PowerQuest's Drive Image handled a similar ratio of data to HD space on my older system. But at least TI does work on this new system, whereas DI doesn't. The only thing I'm wondering is this: If I reformat Disk0 completely, restoring it to its original 300GB/one partition size, use the XP Pro to reinstall windows (minimally, without getting into any major tweaks at all) and while I'm doing that, partition the drive into the size sections I want, then use the TI boot disc to restore everything the way it is now. THEN try PowerQuest Drive Image again, to see if I run into the same "1034 Cylinder Error". If so, then I know that I can no longer count on that program to back up my system. Then it's a matter of where Acronis TI is as far as clearing up why it's taking longer than it seems like it should to restore on my system.

    One question I have, since I'm totally new to ATI, is whether I'd run into the same issues with the version that's above the Home version. If anyone could shed some light on that, I'd appreciate it. (Even though there isn't a full trial version of that higher-level version. I don't know if it's basically the same core as the Home version just with more features locked, or not.)

    Finally, does the Home Trial recovery CD stop working after 15 days as far as its ability to restore an already made image?

    TIA
     
  14. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    My take on the high-level versions which are the corporate products and are designated Version 9.1 is that they offer features to provide more flexibility such as being able to restore an image to a remote machine on the network. The actual engine in both the Home and the corporate is the same starting at build 3567.

    The CD version does not time out which is why it is created as restore only in the trial version. It should be fine.

    Edit: I should add:
    The paid version of TI contains a plugin that can be used with BartPE to build a rescue disk. A BartPE disk has the advantage that it is Windows based and therefore has Windows drivers which can permit better performance.
    Search this forum and the Internet for BartPE if you aren't familiar with it.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2006
  15. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    Thanks. That definitely clears it up. The only thing I think is also worth mentioning is that, according to the site, Workstation 9.1 has the advantage of being able to utilize the $29.99 Universal Restore plug-in, which, for anyone looking to add more hardware to a system (upgrade a mobo/processor/HDD/Video Card) while keeping all their configurations intact (more than a migration that Windows could usually handle without balking) might be worth the difference between Home and Workstation. Just my 2 cents; ymmv.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.