Which One Rollback Rx or FirstDefense-ISR ?

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by DVD+R, Jan 27, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    I'm stuck as to which to use, I have both Rollback Rx is very good, but I found after each install I do with Rollback installed, the bootup time gets longer and longer, just recently it took nearly 80 seconds from Windows boot screen to Desktop. With FDISR Installed the bootup time is about 35 seconds. A BIG! Difference, and I hate the delay Rollback causes, but having said that I also like the option of being able to rollback to a snapshot that is event based, or a day/week/month in time without having to update snapshots each time and create another 4 or 5GB snapshot which is what FDISR snapshots are e.g Primary = 4.1Gb Secondary = 4.1GB and Third 4.1Gb in total 12GB used on these 3 alone. Rollback Rx Snapshots can be as little as 10MB each sometimes 0 in size dependant on whats been installed.
    So my Question is can anyone give any pointers on how to speed up the boottime again with Rollback, or pointers on how to use FDISR in bassically the same way as Rollback. I'm tired now its 2am, :p So Hopefully I can login tomorrow,and see some good replies,and Help me choose which to install,and Keep It ;)
     
  2. wilbertnl

    wilbertnl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Posts:
    1,850
    Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    I have noticed a significant performance improvement by installing Windows on a FAT32 system partition.
    FAT32 is a simple file system, and Rollback RX has to do less integrity checks.
    No reason to debate FAT32 vs. NTFS here, I just give you this tip.

    The performance difference between FAT32/NTFS is confirmed by tech support.
     
  3. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,054
    Hi Wilbert


    I agree about not debating Fat32 vs. NTFS, but if you are right, and I have no doubt about that, that that is a horrible drawback for Rollback. It's almost like saying it will only work will on a Win9x system. It's only going to get worse as time goes on.

    Pete
     
  4. starfish_001

    starfish_001 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Posts:
    1,041

    try re baselining or delete some snapshots -

    in my opinion fat is best avoided
     
  5. wilbertnl

    wilbertnl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Posts:
    1,850
    Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Peter,

    The good news is that win9x is supported by Rollback RX.
    The bad news is that concerning NTFS you are probably right, each and every bugfix/improvement could imply additional intergity checks, causing more overhead.
     
  6. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,054
    Hi Wilbert

    Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see these guys succeed, but I fear having to use a kernel mode driver for disk I/O is a path fraught with obstacles, that Vista is going to make much much worse.

    Pete
     
  7. Jo Ann

    Jo Ann Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Posts:
    508
    I second wilbertni's suggestion and without intending to start a FAT32-NTFS debate, it seems ever since I converted from NTFS to FAT32 RBx not only starts up faster, my 2 PCs also seem to run faster. I might add that RBx has been working smoothly on our PCs ever since I bought our 2 copies last November! :thumb:

    Oh, another thing I did to improve my startup times with RBx was to eliminate taking a snapshot at start/restart. Strategically taking snaphots manually (e.g., before any install/update) works best for me.
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2007
  8. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    OK This poses another question, How do I convert my NTFS Partitioned Hard Drive To FAT32, and do I have to reformat my pc all over again, To Do So? :doubt:
     
  9. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    I Found the Answer PowerQuest Partition Magic 8.0 :D I notice Symantec have taken over,and their version is 8.5 but I avoided that like a Cancer, and installed PowerQuest's version. It worked like a dream, my drive is now FAT32 and I noticed a huge speed increase in all my programs :D Thanks for the tip Wilbert :cool:
     
  10. wilbertnl

    wilbertnl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Posts:
    1,850
    Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    It's my pleasure to help. :)
     
  11. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    What I have discovered, and its kind of alarming, is that after converting to FAT32 I find my hard drive is massively fragmented over 10000 excess fragments, It took overnight to complete the defragment with PerfectDisk 8, and I notice that an Offline defrag will no longer defrag MFT instead it defrags IndexesAfter 3 Smart Pass defrags,and 2 Offlines, I still see excess of 900+ yet PD says my drive is in good condition,and it takes a while to Annalyze the drives too, while with NTFS defrag was reallt quick, Any reason for this ? :blink:
     
  12. wilbertnl

    wilbertnl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Posts:
    1,850
    Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    First off, FAT32 does not have such a thing as MFT, it has a FAT (file allocation table).
    Did you defrag with Rollback RX uninstalled?
    At first defrag seems slower, but that's only once. Reruns aren't that bad.
    When you defrag the directories offline, you notice a enjoyable performance improvement.
     
  13. pvsurfer

    pvsurfer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,400
    Location:
    California - USA
    DVD+R,

    Sounds to me that you performed a PD defrag while Rollback Rx was still installed (which you should not do). If you want to do a PD defrag, first uninstall RBx, then do a PD defrag and then reinstalll RBx after PD has completed its job.

    While RBx is running, the only defrag you should do is a snapshot defrag from within RBx. Using a 3rd party defragger when you have RBx installed is a waste of time and risky!

    ~pv
     
  14. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    No!, I hadn't got to the stage where I had installed Rollback again yet,after converting to FAT32 with partition magic, I decided to run PD to defrag my drive before installing Rollback. First PD told me I needed to do an Offline Pass, which I did, including the indexes, This then told me there was insufficient space to perform an offline pass,and reboted my PC. I then went to do an entire disk defrag. After an hour it was at 3%,after 4 hours it was at 21% :blink: so I left it running overnight, and in the morning it was finished, but there were still a 1000 or so excess fragments. I ran PD again, the Analasis took 2 minutes compared with 30 seconds on NTFS, again after 3 hours it was only 20% (it wasnt quicker Wilbert) nor was the 3rd defrag, yet even with all these excess fragments, PD reported my drive was in good condition,and no pass was needed, but on the PD defrag interface, I could clearly see a unfragmented drive, the clusters were not all smooth they were all mixed up and uneven. I tried to fdisk and format my drive with a Windows ME boot disk, but it only created a partition of just over 50GB. My Drive is 160GB, so there would be 100GB doing nothing. Is it possible to fdisk and format and create a 160GB partition, or is FAT32 Limited to a small size? When I enter setup with my wINDOWS cd IT TELLS ME TO FORMAT THE PARTITION USING ntfs, There is no option that I can see for FAT32. I even tried to format from opening My Computer,and right clicking on format of my C Drive, it said format using NTFS, even though my partition had been converted to FAT32 :blink:
     
  15. pilotart

    pilotart Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Posts:
    377
    Had wanted a small drive to use as external, for backups and transfer of files from WinXP system to old Win98 system. Got a 40Gig and a format to FAT32 said that 30G was maximum. Then tried to store a 10GB backup file and found that was also above a FAT32 maximum for one file.

    Used PartitionMagic (PowerQuest's last) to partition to a 10Gig Fat32 and 30Gig NTFS partitions.
     
  16. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    Looks like I have cured the headache, I installed Perfect Disk, Defragged the Drive,and installed Rollback, Then I Installed Partition Magic Again,and Converted to FAT32, then I defragged the Snapshots with Rollback Defrag. Startup time is now 17 seconds from the Windows Boot Screen :D :cool: Horizon Dats Sys didnt confirm to me, there was going to be an update to fix this problem, All they told me is FAT32 is a faster Startup :shifty: and Had I disabled Rollback from Starting With Windows :blink:
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.