Pause & Un-pause


Author
Message
Ruut
Ruut
New Member
New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6, Visits: 16
I am trying to create an image of a 2 TB disk (half-full) which behaves badly. The file/folder structure is OK as confirmed by Dskchk, Disk Docter and Data Lifeguard (WD): no bad blocks. However while creating an image the read/write transfer rate is extremely low: 4.4 Mb/s (sometimes rising up to 50-800 Mb/s for a minute or so). Consequently creating an image will take some 400 hours.As I don't want to keep my computer on all the time for such a long period my question is: can I pause the imaging process > shut down my computer and then continue the imaging process at another time?
jphughan
jphughan
Macrium Evangelist
Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.4K, Visits: 33K
You can pause image backup jobs, but you wouldn’t be able to shut your system down. You MIGHT be able to put it to sleep or hibernate it and resume later, but I’m not sure and I personally wouldn’t do it. The other possibility with a job that long is that Windows might delete the temporary VSS snapshot before Reflect is finished using it to create an image. But more importantly, even if that method worked, it isn’t addressing the underlying problem. Capturing 1TB of data in an image backup should take maybe 3 hours if a USB 3.0 spinning drive or network share that’s reachable over Gigabit Ethernet is the target. If your source disk seems ok, what about your destination? Where are you capturing this image to? Someone just a few days ago posted here that he was experiencing extremely low performance capturing an image of his internal drive to an external drive and fixed it by replacing the USB cable his external hard drive was using.
Ruut
Ruut
New Member
New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6, Visits: 16
jphughan - 5 February 2019 3:19 PM
You can pause image backup jobs, but you wouldn’t be able to shut your system down. You MIGHT be able to put it to sleep or hibernate it and resume later, but I’m not sure and I personally wouldn’t do it. The other possibility with a job that long is that Windows might delete the temporary VSS snapshot before Reflect is finished using it to create an image. But more importantly, even if that method worked, it isn’t addressing the underlying problem. Capturing 1TB of data in an image backup should take maybe 3 hours if a USB 3.0 spinning drive or network share that’s reachable over Gigabit Ethernet is the target. If your source disk seems ok, what about your destination? Where are you capturing this image to? Someone just a few days ago posted here that he was experiencing extremely low performance capturing an image of his internal drive to an external drive and fixed it by replacing the USB cable his external hard drive was using.

Thank you for your quick reply! (If only my source disk was that fast!). The faulty disk was part of an Icy-Box container with 4 disks: 2x 2 TB & 2x 8 TB, connected via USB 3.0. I have tested the other 3 disks and they behave perfectly. When I discovered that the 2TB behaved badly I took it out of the Icy Box and connected it directly to the computer (SATA 600). In both situations the disk behaved badly. Since I don't want to lose the data on this disk it seemed logical to try and create an image of it on one of the 8 TB disks (free space > 2.5 TB) before doing anything else. The idea is to then either try and repair the disk or buy a new one.
I could of course buy a new disk first and then try to use the standard file copy process but it seems to me that that such process would probably take even longer because of its overhead. But doing it that way would have the advantage that it can be interrupted easelly since not all folders need to be transferred at once.
Your comments are highly appreciated.

jphughan
jphughan
Macrium Evangelist
Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.4K, Visits: 33K
Oh ok, so you're just trying to capture a final image of a disk that you're planning to retire anyway.  I thought you were trying to use this pause strategy as part of an ongoing solution.  If it's just a temporary need, then I'd just try to keep a PC running as long as it takes.  You might find that it's only slow for part of the process and the rest proceeds as normal if the damage is confined to a certain area of the disk, so the 400-hour extrapolation may not necessarily be accurate.  As for file copies, if you have particularly crucial data you want to get off that drive asap, that might actually be worth trying, and again if that data happens to be in an unaffected area of the disk, those copies might occur at normal speeds -- and that way if the disk does happen to die completely, you'd at least have something rather than nothing.  Good luck!

Edited 5 February 2019 5:43 PM by jphughan
dbminter
dbminter
Expert
Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 652, Visits: 5.3K
Actually, I had wondered just today if part of this was possible.  To have a running backup, pause it, and put the PC into Hibernate mode.  To see if the backup would resume on waking up and unpausing it.  I had imagined a scenario where I was doing a backup and the power went out.  My UPS would keep the PC running, but I'd probably not have enough stored up power to complete the backup.

Ruut
Ruut
New Member
New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6, Visits: 16
dbminter - 5 February 2019 11:23 PM
Actually, I had wondered just today if part of this was possible.  To have a running backup, pause it, and put the PC into Hibernate mode.  To see if the backup would resume on waking up and unpausing it.  I had imagined a scenario where I was doing a backup and the power went out.  My UPS would keep the PC running, but I'd probably not have enough stored up power to complete the backup.

Thank you both (jphughan &  dbminter) very much for reacting.
The backup process has been going for a couple of days now at more or less the same speed:4.4 Mb/sec for 10-15 minutes, rising up to some 50-800 Mb/sec for a minute or so. These outbursts of high speed have obviously a considerable effect on the average transfer rate: equal to about 1% per hour. With 42% remaining it should be complete in about 2 days. My major worry now is to lose it all because of a powercut....
I'll keep you posted.
dbminter
dbminter
Expert
Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)Expert (866 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 652, Visits: 5.3K
Oh, forgot to add my additional 2 cents earlier.


I agree the Windows/File Explorer copy bit, which as was pointed out, you can cancel and resume later without losing time and work.


And that before doing that, you might want to give a partition backup another shot.  Let it run for a while over the "bad" areas and see if it can get over the slowdown hump.  Of course, it might turn out there are other bad areas and this slowdown process will just repeat itself.  I wouldn't give it more than an hour or 2, though, to try and get by that bad patch.

Seekforever
Seekforever
Expert
Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)Expert (746 reputation)
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 483, Visits: 6.7K
When dealing with what looks like a failing disk my approach would be to make things as simple as possible and to do what might be called a triage on the files that are in jeopardy. To do this I would not use Reflect but revert to plain old Windows File Explorer or an equivalent method that just copies files in their native format and structure. I would first attempt to copy my most important files, then the less important files and then the remainder.

This avoids putting the target into a container file and if any file(s) won't copy they do not risk making the other files inaccessible.​ This risk may be small but it is not as simple a method as just straight file copies.
Although faulty disk surface issues are a common cause of being unable to read a file from disk, remember it is not the only thing that can go wrong with a disk​.​
Ruut
Ruut
New Member
New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)New Member (7 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6, Visits: 16
Seekforever - 6 February 2019 2:59 PM
When dealing with what looks like a failing disk my approach would be to make things as simple as possible and to do what might be called a triage on the files that are in jeopardy. To do this I would not use Reflect but revert to plain old Windows File Explorer or an equivalent method that just copies files in their native format and structure. I would first attempt to copy my most important files, then the less important files and then the remainder.

This avoids putting the target into a container file and if any file(s) won't copy they do not risk making the other files inaccessible. This risk may be small but it is not as simple a method as just straight file copies.
Although faulty disk surface issues are a common cause of being unable to read a file from disk, remember it is not the only thing that can go wrong with a disk.

Alas! Shortly after publishing my last post Reflect crashed with ErrorCode 23: Unable to read from disk. So I am back to square one. As suggested by Seekforever I ran a test with a couple of folders and much to my surprise that went smoothly: almost at full diskspeed. So I have now decided to order a new disk and copy all data on it. Just see how it goes.
While waiting for the new disk I'm using HDDScan 4.0 to do a surface test. It is still running: sofar 11% done, no bad blocks but 32 blocks with access time higher than 500 msec. Awaiting further results I will keep you posted. Thanks for all your help!
jphughan
jphughan
Macrium Evangelist
Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)Macrium Evangelist (6.6K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.4K, Visits: 33K
If you're losing ground reading data from the disk, I would stop with the scans.  Scans place quite a bit of load on the disk, and at this point as you say, you should be replacing this disk rather than trying to revive it for long-term continued use, so a scan is probably more likely to hasten the onset of total failure than accomplish anything positive at this stage.  Your immediate goal should be to just grab whatever data you can while you still can.  After you safely copy any data you can access at normal speeds, if your disk is still working, at THAT point going back to scans in order to potentially gain access to data that you couldn't quickly copy before could be worthwhile, but take whatever you can get now.

Edited 6 February 2019 7:04 PM by jphughan
GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Similar Topics

Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search