RE: [OT] Disk imaging (again)

["White, Peter" <peter.white@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm being told that we're getting a xfer rate of 1Gb per minute via the
USB2/IDE connection, however, as there's 40GB going across rather than the
4-8GB, it's taking 40 mins rather than 5-10. The size of the image is not
as
important, but the time it takes to do the xfer is, as time is money, and
we're doing about 7,500 of these things....

I'll get our guys to look into PQI - thanks.

Pete

_____

From: Paul Gordon [mailto:paul@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 22 October 2004 16:59
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] [OT] Disk imaging (again)


Hi Peter,

Can't really speak for Ghost, since I tend to almost exclusively use
Powerquest Imagecenter (sic). (PQI)

However, your description of the way Ghost works surprises me somewhat..
I should have thought that it would be as intelligent as you describe, -
I'm pretty certain PQI is...

I Use PQI all the time to image 10GB system partitions, which typically
have about 6GB used on them, and with PQI's compression turned up to
max, I usually get image sizes around the 1.5GB-2GB size.

Obviously it has the potential to look at the whole disk, since as you
say, the data could be scattered all over it, but it sounds like you are
saying the software meticulously reads the whole capacity of the
partition, whether data is there or not....

PQI only copies *Used* areas of the partition, which is to say that if I
have 6GB of data on a 10GB partition or 6GB of data on a 200GB
partition, both the final image size, and the time taken to create the
image is the same.. - In each case PQI reads & writes just the 6GB that
is used....
Are you saying that in your case, the 6GB of data on the 200GB partition
would either take longer or produce a larger image?

Paul G.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: White, Peter [mailto:peter.white@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 22 October 2004 16:34
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: [ukha_d] [OT] Disk imaging (again)
>
>
> Chaps
>
> You may remember I asked about this a while ago, and I've got just 1
more
> question....the problems we're seeing with Norton Ghost (and similar)
is
> that to do the disk image, it has to go through all 40Gb or 80Gb of
the
> source disk, then copy the image over to the destination disk.  The
> problem
> is that the source disks only have 4-8GB of data on them, so ideally
I'd
> like something a bit more logical in doing the copy.  I know data can
be
> scattered all over the disk, but we will get the users to do a defrag
> first,
> so it shouldn't be too bad.  Does anyone have any suggestions in terms
of
> a
> good disk imaging app? We're using USB2-IDE to actually connect the
> drives.
>
> Thanks, and sorry about the OT post.
>
>
> Pete
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>