TI Ver 10 trial results

Discussion in 'Acronis True Image Product Line' started by brachd, Nov 8, 2006.

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

    brachd Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    Posts:
    56
    Results so far from trying out TI 10 after a few hours
    Backup worked fine (only one file containing my phone numbers and addresses 133Kb):)
    What I particularly liked was the ability to actually see the backup files as the origionals when opened in Windows Explorer:)
    I then deleted the origional file
    Restore worked fine and restored the file:)
    Then changed an entry in the file and carried out an incremantal backup
    This was successful:) but I saw that it was basically the same size again as the origional file(134Kb). With only one entry changed I had expected a very small file
    With no change at all I carried out another Inc BU and again the same size of file. This gave the impression of a differential BU
    I then tried a differential BU and got a similar resulto_O
    Why is this happening
    I then looked at the other facilities and found them easy to understand and use.
    But in the case of the secure Zone it would not allow me to create one after selecting the biggest partition (12Gb free space)
    Finally the main reason for looking at Ver10 was the easy backing up of Outlook Express.
    I'm afraid this did not work very well and although I created a backup of sorts when I restored I was informed that the file was corrupted.
    Apart from that I still find it confusing picking the right file and location. This is probably my fault as I find this sometimes difficult using Ver 8
    I would be interested in what others found.
    I should say finally that the general impression is good:D
     
  2. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

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

    You need to remember that TI doesn't image at the "file" level - it backs up the data on the in-use sectors. Each time you start and shutdown Windows or applications the thumbprint of the in-use sectors will change significantly, irrespective of whether you altered any files or not. Therefore, unless you made a fairly large change to the disk's content or carried out a disk defrag, the layout of in-use sectors caused by opening/closing the OS and/or applications will more or less mask the changes caused by altering a single file.

    Regards
     
  3. brachd

    brachd Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    Posts:
    56
    Thank you for your explanation.
    I'm afraid I didn't make my point clearly enough.
    For example if I did an initial backup of 1Gb and subsequently changed one item I would expect the incremental backup to be a very small size in Kb and not appear again as 1Gb for the incremantal backup.
    In my case I had chosen a very smaill file but the same principal should apply
    o_O
     
  4. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Posts:
    4,661
    Location:
    Menorca (Balearic Islands) Spain
    O.K. Thanks for the clarification. My understanding now is that you created a Full Files and Folders image of a single (text/doc?) file containing phone numbers and addresses. This resulted in a 133KB .tib file. You then amended a single entry of info in this file and created an Incremental backup resulting in a 134KB image. Is that correct? If so, then I'm not surprised the two images were more or less the same size as the actual number sectors used by the basic raw file will hardly have changed at all.

    Now, imagine you had created a Full image of a complete folder containing a number of files that resulted in an image of 1GB. If you then added a file of 200KB to the original folder and created an Incremental of that folder, I would expect the resultant .tib file to be around 120KB (depending on the level of compression achieved for the additional 200KB file).

    Regards
     
  5. brachd

    brachd Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    Posts:
    56
    Thnak you for your reply
    I have read your reply a number of times and each time I think I understand then the next time I get puzzled.
    My trial backup was in fact a folder containing 23 files
    I added one further file as the change and this was carried out immediately after without any further changes to anything else.
    Are you saying that because it was only a single folder any change would result in the file size being almost identical to the origional but if I was creating a full backup of a number of folders of 1 Gb and did a similar alteration the result would only the same size as in the previous case?
    I hope I have expressed this clearly.o_O
    I do want to understand
     
  6. foghorne

    foghorne Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,389
    Location:
    Leeds, Great Britain
    Hi Menorcaman,

    I think the question being asked here is, if we assume an incremental only represents the changes since the full backup - why would it include all the data which has not changed.

    F.
     
  7. brachd

    brachd Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    Posts:
    56
    You have got it in one Foghorn:D
     
  8. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Posts:
    4,661
    Location:
    Menorca (Balearic Islands) Spain
    Hi there foghorne,

    Reading brachd's Post #1 left me with the impression that he created a F & F image of a single doc or text file containing phone numbers and addresses, which resulted in a 133KB .tib file. I took it that he "changed an entry in the file" (his words), i.e. amended a phone number or address, and then created an incremental of the same file. I was therefore not surprised that both images were the same size!!

    However, his second follow-up at Post #5 made it crystal clear that he actually imaged a complete folder containing 23 files. After adding a file to the folder and creating an Incremental image of that folder it resulted in a .tib file slightly larger (134KB) than the original Full image. In which case that is wrong and I agree that the size of the resultant incremental image should only have reflected the file that he added.

    I have just tested the aforesaid scenario using TI 9.0 Home Build 3677 as follows:

    - Created a Full Files & Folders image of a folder containing 14 files totalling 543KB. This resulted in a 191KB .tib file (default compression set to Normal).
    - Added a 20KB file to the folder and created an Incremental of the complete folder. This now resulted in a 5KB .tib file.

    So, for TI 9.0 Home at least, incremental Files and Folders imaging functions as we would all expect :).

    Hopefully some kind user will repeat the test using TI 10.0 Home and advise his results.

    Regards
     
  9. TheWeaz

    TheWeaz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Posts:
    1,562
    "Hopefully some kind user will repeat the test using TI 10.0 Home and advise his results."

    Works as expected.
     
  10. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Posts:
    4,661
    Location:
    Menorca (Balearic Islands) Spain
    Thanks TheWeaz. I guess that just leaves "operator error" or the Trial version contains another "anomally" to add to the missing E-mail Notification option o_O.

    Regards
     
  11. foghorne

    foghorne Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,389
    Location:
    Leeds, Great Britain
    Hi Menorcaman,

    thanks for the clarification. Your interpretation was right, I had missed the single file element of the scenario.

    F.
     
  12. _Kento_

    _Kento_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Posts:
    96
    Hello brachd,

    Just a curiosity, did you type the name for the incremental backup or select the full backup and chose to create incremental? If you did the first the full backup will be created and therefore will have almost the same size as previous full backup.

    May be my misunderstanding but did the backup file reported as corrupted or another file reported as corrupted AFTER the restoration?

    _Kento_
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.