Very weird partition map...

Discussion in 'Paragon Drive Backup Product Line' started by ralws277, Dec 21, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ralws277

    ralws277 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Posts:
    31
    Location:
    Boston
    I just recently downloaded Backup & Restore 2012 Free addition. On my external drive, I used another product to resize a couple partitions, in preparation for using them for partition image backup storage.

    After creating the space I wanted, I fired up Backup & Restore, and was greeted with a very strange sight. At first I couldn't even figure out what the disk layout graphic was showing, because the partition representation was so out of kilter. I had created a 96GB primary partition, which was by far the largest partition on the disk (it's a 160GB disk), but via the "Disk View" mode, I didn't even see it there at all, until I realized that there was a little teeny sliver of a thing on the right end of the partition that wasn't even large enough to show a drive letter, and THAT was my 96GB new partition!

    The other partitions are graphically completely out of proportion as well. In the graphic I've inserted here, I've labeled three partitions. From left to right, they're a 13GB partition with 9GB used, next is a 12GB chunk of unallocated space, then at the very right end is the sliver that's supposed to represent the 96GB partition. As you can see, the 13GB partition takes up about 80% of the display area, the 12GB of unallocated space (which should be about the same size, graphically) is maybe 10% of the space, and the 96GB partition, which should be the great majority of the space shown, is just a little sliver at the right end.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/91353820@N04/8292947533/ Oops... or at the bottom of the page -- I didn't think "attaching" had worked, but apparently it did...

    I realize this is just a graphic representation, but it's making me awfully uneasy about trusting that the program is actually interpreting the disk info correctly. Can anybody explain this?? I even uninstalled and re-installed the program, re-booted my computer a couple times, and same result. I looked at the "partition map" (disk representation) in two other products and it looked fine, with the partitions displayed proportionally correctly, by the way...

    Has anybody else run into this kind of thing? How concerned should I be??

    Thanks for any input here...

    Robert...

    P.S. I realize that Flickr isn't a very geeky image hosting place, but I haven't ever posted an image to a forum before, thought people used a service called photobucket but it seemed to not be working right or something when I tried it. If anyone cares to tell me about a better place to use for any future images, I'm all ears (well.. metaphorically speaking anyhow...).
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Dec 21, 2012
  2. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    If you go into Disk View you will see a drop-down arrow at the far right on the same line as the words "Disk Map" above the partition layout graphics. Click on it and you will see the setting is "Logarithimic" which means the partitions on the left are afforded more space than the ones on the right. Change it to Linear and it will likely fix your problem.

    The above is based on B&R 11 Home (paid) but is likely the same or similar in other products.
     
  3. ralws277

    ralws277 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Posts:
    31
    Location:
    Boston
    Thanks, SeekForever!! Was you nic created to reflect how long it would take someone to find that option, lol?? Sheesh, they should make that a little more obvious, or change the default view to the "Linear With Minimum Width". I'm sure I'm not the first person to have been scratching their head over this. :rolleyes:

    Anyway, thanks so much for your speedy reply!!
     
  4. seekforever

    seekforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Posts:
    4,751
    No, you weren't the first person to ask which is why I knew what to tell you. Somebody else answered a similar question a few weeks ago and I happened to read the thread. It was easier to pretend I knew all about it than try and find the original thread. I agree you could scratch your head for a long time trying to sort it out if you didn't know it was there.

    Now my secret's out!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.