Wording of Merge operations


Author
Message
RayG
RayG
Expert
Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)Expert (724 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 349, Visits: 1.5K
Retention Rules
      Rules will be applied to all matching backup sets in the destination folder
Incremental:   Retain 10 incremental images
      Create a Synthetic Full backup if possible.
Incremental Backups:10 found
Consolidation:   Merging 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-00-00.mrimg' to 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-03-03.mrimg'
      Merge completed successfully in 00:00:15
      Deleted 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-03-03.mrimg'


I have just noticed that when merging incrementals into a full synthetic backup the words do not perhaps read correctly?

In the example above (if I have this correct) isn't: 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-03-03.mrimg'
being merged into the full backup: 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-00-00.mrimg'

If I am correct should the words not say:
Merging 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-03-03.mrimg' into 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-00-00.mrimg'
or
Merging 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-00-00.mrimg' with 'win10-x64-IncForever #2017-08-17-09-07#-03-03.mrimg'

Not an importatnt issue but...


Regards
RayG
Windows10 Pro X64 V22H2 B19045.3803 MR v8.1.7784
jphughan
jphughan
Macrium Evangelist
Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (22K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K, Visits: 85K
You're understanding the operation correctly; the Full is being updated with the contents of 03-03 and then the latter is being deleted.  I contacted Macrium with this exact feedback (and I think even those exact alternative wording suggestions) a while ago via email since I hadn't yet joined the forum, and they replied saying they'd consider changing it.  The wording is indeed not quite right, because it makes it sound as if Reflect is updating 03-03 and then immediately deleting it.  I personally prefer the "into" wording since it makes it clear which file will be "absorbing" the other, whereas the "with" wording leaves it ambiguous.

Edited 27 August 2017 6:02 PM by jphughan
GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search