Too slow to be useful

Hummmmmm, just read all 25 posts here and I certainly agree with the Subjects header - To slow 2b useful!

Unless I missed it in this thread it wasn't mentioned time required to do a Restore. I just finished a restore of a 35GB something that took over 15 hours to complete.

I could care less about the terms "Verification vs. Validation" because the bottom line neither can be trusted and you MUST do a restore in order to be sure your image is good and if it takes 24 hours to get your system back on a "test" Good God just try to imagine if your system was in a working enviroment and you told the boss the system won't be back on-line for at least 24 hours....you would be dead meat and you only hope the system comes back on-line when complete.

I doubt I added anything to this thread of value but I'm so PO'ed about this software it's just maddening. Acronis tech support doesn't even drop in and post comments any more.

I've been using ATI since Version 6 but no more!

Rod Moses

 

What spec systems were you using including HDD's and network? If you're using IDE HDD's and a 10Mbit network then the slowness is understandable.

I can backup and validate a 10GB image over a 100Mbit network with SATA HDD's in less than 1 hour. In theory I could do it for a 35GB image in 3.5 hours.

 

A restore internal to internal drive should take less than 35 minutes for that amount of data

Xpilot

 

themidge wants my Spec's......(I would expect Acronis would ask me that but anyway here ya go)

Very basic - NO NETWORK involved!

2 internal HDD's - my images are kept on a WD Raptor 10K RPM 16MB buffer; I have an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 with 3GB RAM.

It took almost 17 hours to do a basic restore of my Drive-C.

Rod

 

Wow, that is slow! Are you using compression? I can't understand that with those system specs.

 

Normal compression!

 

A shot in the dark. what is the maximum amount of RAM that the motherboard can take ? Someone on this forum has suggested that one can have too much RAM and it should be kept well below the maximum. I had not heard of this before but I suppose it could cause timing problems.

Another thought is that even though you have 3GB of ram plugged in does it all show as being present and correct in system properties?

I only have 640MB of RAM and a slow AMD processor and yet it restores internal to internal drive at 1 GB a minute. This has been virtually the same for all versions 8 to 11.

Xpilot

 

For images, I consider this a myth that has been perpetuated by people who validate only in Windows and never try to do a couple of test restores to ensure the Linux environment works on their PC. The first time they need to do a restore they fire up the Linux recovery CD and it craps out. Immediately the wailing starts that the validate didn't work. Well, the wrong environment was used and the odds are very high there is nothing wrong with the archive.

When I install a new build of TI I do a test restore or two and if I weren't doing restores every now and then as a result of restoring my C drive after software testing, I would do a restore to ensure nothing has changed on my system. I backup in Windows and I validate in Windows with confidence after having ensured the Linux validate and restore works. TI has its faults but the basic imaging and restore process is not one of them. The Linux recovery environment is another story.

I consider the steps in the preceeding to be necessary because you can have RAM, or disk cables, etc go bad. TI assumes that your hardware is 100% solid.

 

If you're using the Full Mode (Linux-based) version of TI (either from the CD or by rebooting Windows into it), I would guess that the Linux drivers are not optimized correctly for your system/chipset. In this case, the CPU speed and RAM make no difference as the bottleneck is the driver.

Since you are using internal drives, have you tried the Safe Mode version? It may be many times faster.

 

Xpilot,

My goodness, I get more inquiring ?'s from folks in this forum than I do from Acronis.

I have an HP Pavilion a6152n (Intel VIIV); FSB is 667Mhz and the memory capacity is 4GB but HP installed only 3GB dual memory - 2 sticks @ 1GB and 2 sticks @ 512MB = 3GB Dual channal. This is what I see using Belare Advisor.

Are you familiar with PC Pitstop? My numbers on way off the chart - system is described as, I forget the exact wording, but something like performance is so high we have nothing in the current DB to compare with.

Rod

 

Believe it or not but your super speeds could be the cause of the problem !
You could try pulling 1 GB of memory and see what happens.

As I can restore at 1 GB per minute with a mere fraction of you computer power I believe you are suffering from the electronic equivalent of severe wheel spin with no traction control.

Xpilot

 

Hey seekforever,

I think we are saying the same thing, right? You must try to restore your image on your system and NOT rely on Verifications or Validations to be sure you can restore your system in time of need, right?

I'm to a point, after using Version 6 through 10, that this product cannot be trusted and backup/restore programs must have the highest of confidence in order to be in my bag of Trusted Utilities!

I know several folks who I have convinced that making system images is the BEST way to go in case disaster hits and they are using ATI but they have not tested their images by doing restores on their systems because they are afraid. If you read some of the threads in this forum certainly you can understand where they are coming from.

Enough said......

Rod

 

Hello, Xpilot,

Remove some RAM - easy to do, but if that is the problem do I really want to know it?

This is the part where if Acronis was monitoring their forum they would jump in with their 2 cents worth - I'm sure it would be helpful!

Fourtunately, I have several other PC's and a iMac up and running so to do your test is NOT asking a lot otherwise I would have to spend another day or two waiting for my Vista system to complete it's restore.

I did mention it was a Home Vista Premium didn't I?

Rod

 

We are saying the same thing when we are doing test restores after a new build or hardware is installed, what I don't agree with is the sentiment preached that you always must restore every archive you produce in order to have any degree of confidence.

As for those who haven't done any restores we do agree they haven't a real backup strategy in place yet.

I do find it annoying that you can't just tell somebody to go out and buy TI and use it without having to worry about doing a good restore. I would tell people to do buy PowerQuest's Drive Image and I knew it would work. I never recommend TI to anybody who I know doesn't have the capability or ambition to do a test restore.

 

Nah - me either; I didn't mean to imply you must do a restore every time you create a new image; like you said once you have "confidence" in your system and you know ATI will restore with confidence you're good to go.

Yep - I stopped recommeding ATI around Version 8 or so and now I basically use Nero BackItUp 2.

Rod

 

Installed version 11.0, did a Backup in DOS, using the Recovery CD for a 26 Gigs on my Partition C;/

Took 45 Minutes, did that with Farstone DriveCkine Pro in just under 30 mims as well as R-Drive.

But I like the new Version 11.0 Recovery CD, totally supports USB.....

 

All I have to offer is that with my TI 11, my validation takes way too long too. I do have a fast system with 8GB of RAM and I'm wondering now after reading the posts if this is a software (Acronis) not hardware issue.

Validating even a small tib file takes hours, this is silly. And I have to validate because I've had corrupted TI 11 tib files.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Paul
Chandler, AZ

P.S. Shout out to MudCrab - this guy knows TI and has been a great help to me.

 

Nailzaz,

Sorry, the only advice I can offer at this point would be totally inappropriate; but I can say I have moved on to other imaging/restore software. Acronis has lost me as a long faithful customer going back to Version 6 of TI.

Taking hours to do a restore is just plain unacceptable and working with Acronis tech support, if you're lucky, is just as bad.

Rod - Out!

 

Rod,

First, thanks for the reply. Second, for me I just need solutions and I'm not loyal to Acronis.

That being said, which software are you using or would recommend?

Thanks,
Paul

 

Hummmmm, OK, Paul. I'm reluctant to say what product I've switched to in this forum but if I had your email address I would be willing to tell you. I'm sure there is some way to send private emails via this forum but I don't have time to figure it out.

Rod

 

That is an absurdly long time and unless all your other progs are running that slow, then the very likely suspect is ATI and an inability to deal properly with your hardware.

Usually, absurdly long tomes are only seen when ATI's version of linux treats a USB drive incorrectly as USB 1.1 instead of 2.0.

It won't be painless but you'll have to see if Tech Support can figure out why ATI isn't working correctly on your machine. So if you haven't filled out a ticket, do so. Be prepared for them to ask you to prepare sysinfo files in Windows and in linux. They might have a driver update they are already working on or need to develop one for you and others with a similar set up.

good luck.

 

That's the key point here - THE PAIN! Can't take it anymore!

Rod

 

The range of help in this forum is very short. ATI is not working correctly for me and I wait for an update since one month. The safe version of the Rescue CD is a joke. The restore needs more than 3 hours for a 50 GB partition where only 30 GB are in use. The Intel Raid problem should be solved in a shorter time. I can´t understand the update policy of Acronis. In a companys sight a happy customer must be the target. Here the customers were doublecrossed. If we have the customers money, the game is over for us.
Is this the target ?

 

Game over for me.....