Cloning large drives

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlie Hoffpauir
  • Start date Start date
C

Charlie Hoffpauir

Anyone have a good recommendation for software to use to clone large
drives? I've used Acronis and Easeus, with a lot more success cloning
a 1 TB to another 1 TB with Easeus, but it takes a LONG time, 5-6
hours. (Acronis doesn't want to clone 1TB to 1TB, claiming the new
disk isn't large enough).

BTW, these are drives in DVR service, so OS is some form of linux, if
that makes a difference.

I'd like something a bit faster, since I'm considering going to a
larger drive, either 1.5 or 2 TB, and it would take almost 12 hours to
do that using Easeus.

And, is the cloning speed in any way dependent on the computer I'm
using? My box is a fairly old build, with a Core 2 E8400 processor and
8 GB RAM.
 
Anyone have a good recommendation for software to use to clone large
drives? I've used Acronis and Easeus, with a lot more success cloning
a 1 TB to another 1 TB with Easeus, but it takes a LONG time, 5-6
hours. (Acronis doesn't want to clone 1TB to 1TB, claiming the new
disk isn't large enough).

BTW, these are drives in DVR service, so OS is some form of linux, if
that makes a difference.

I'd like something a bit faster, since I'm considering going to a
larger drive, either 1.5 or 2 TB, and it would take almost 12 hours to
do that using Easeus.

And, is the cloning speed in any way dependent on the computer I'm
using? My box is a fairly old build, with a Core 2 E8400 processor and
8 GB RAM.
Click to expand...


I'm using Beyond Compare Version 3
Pro Edition for Windows
2013

There's some scripting/macro abilities to it, although haven't quite
got it anywhere near what I'd want for automation purposes

ATTRIB BEEP COLLAPSE COMPARE COPY COPYTO CRITERIA DATA-REPORT DELETE
EXPAND FILE-REPORT FILTER FOLDER-REPORT HEX-REPORT LOAD LOG MOVE
MP3-REPORT OPTION PICTURE-REPORT REGISTRY-REPORT RENAME SELECT
SNAPSHOT SYNC TEXT-REPORT TOUCH VERSION-REPORT

Expressions, metadata identifiers, odds and ends variously for parsing
to the command line call.

Nothing so draconian as a sector-to-sector binary copy, I prefer
outside the OS, IOW for a basically simple Windows program GUI
interface.

So far as speed, most MBs will natively match or close enough to
Windows for sustained throughput.

The usual. Budget HDs, ignominy of misnomers, 7200RPM averaging or
larger than a T-copy, figure optimistically at 30-40MByte/sec or
3-times faster than USB2.

No SSD, USB3, 10,000RPM drives, raid arrays, and such. IOW.

So, no, it's not dependent on the computer, cloning speed, Charlie;-
it's all relative to maximizing a utility of potential in terms of
atomically molecular speeds electrons blaze through. That limitation
programmed for, say, in sequential backups -- that which occurs behind
a vastly slower relative conception of human conscious -- is just
another abstract ratio to how very little processing power is utilized
when a computer is employed, sitting on a desk, connected and powered
24/7, just to satisfy a user's occasional whim to see some Inet
grab-ass. (If it's worth it it's worth waiting for is my motto: I
don't ever never go to Grab Ass sites. -eh.)
 
Charlie said:
Anyone have a good recommendation for software to use to clone large
drives? I've used Acronis and Easeus, with a lot more success cloning
a 1 TB to another 1 TB with Easeus, but it takes a LONG time, 5-6
hours. (Acronis doesn't want to clone 1TB to 1TB, claiming the new
disk isn't large enough).

BTW, these are drives in DVR service, so OS is some form of linux, if
that makes a difference.

I'd like something a bit faster, since I'm considering going to a
larger drive, either 1.5 or 2 TB, and it would take almost 12 hours to
do that using Easeus.

And, is the cloning speed in any way dependent on the computer I'm
using? My box is a fairly old build, with a Core 2 E8400 processor and
8 GB RAM.
Click to expand...

Try Macrium Reflect Free.

It has Intelligent Sector transfer. So only the sectors holding
files get transferred. It can also handle differences in partition
size.

You'd only need to make the boot CD is offers, if doing the clone
with no Windows OS running.

(Free download, lower left corner)

http://www.macrium.com/reflectfree.aspx

The downloader stub application, will offer "WinPE WAIK" boot
disc as an option. That increases the download size to 100-150MB,
but it's worth it for emergencies later. If you have the time,
make a boot CD for future usage. You can do backup and restore
with that CD.

Paul
 
Try Macrium Reflect Free.

It has Intelligent Sector transfer. So only the sectors holding
files get transferred. It can also handle differences in partition
size.

You'd only need to make the boot CD is offers, if doing the clone
with no Windows OS running.

(Free download, lower left corner)

http://www.macrium.com/reflectfree.aspx

The downloader stub application, will offer "WinPE WAIK" boot
disc as an option. That increases the download size to 100-150MB,
but it's worth it for emergencies later. If you have the time,
make a boot CD for future usage. You can do backup and restore
with that CD.

Paul
Click to expand...


Well, that didn't really work. Apparently the OS used by the DirecTV
DVR is sufficently different from std Linux that Macrium Reflect
thinks the three partitions on the disk are unformatted, and so after
only a few seconds, reports that the clone was made. In fact, nothing
was copied.
 
Charlie said:
Well, that didn't really work. Apparently the OS used by the DirecTV
DVR is sufficently different from std Linux that Macrium Reflect
thinks the three partitions on the disk are unformatted, and so after
only a few seconds, reports that the clone was made. In fact, nothing
was copied.
Click to expand...

What do you know about the partition types ?

This program can parse the disk contents, and tell you
what is on the disk. For example, if there were FreeBSD partitions
on there, it could tell you.

http://disktype.sourceforge.net/

Once you know the partition type, perhaps a better tool choice
will come to mind.

Hardware with disks inside, would be limited to FAT32. If they
used NTFS, the Microsoft lawyers would be on them immediately.
I think Microsoft went after Garmin, about usage of a Windows
file system. That leaves things like Linux EXT2, or them
choosing something much more exotic, purely for the purpose
of preventing you from copying.

I could use "dd" to copy the disk, but that would take
five or six hours. Even at the best of times, the various
"dd" solutions I've got, never go at "disk rate". I get maybe
half the transfer rate, to as low as 13MB/sec in some
cases. I'm not going to recommend that, because your existing
tools will beat that benchmark.

What you want, is a utility that recognizes the partition type,
and only copies the sectors with data in them. A so-called
Intelligent Copy.

*******

And lists like this, don't appear to be complete.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disk_cloning_software

*******

Perhaps if you hit up Google search with the make and model
of the box the disk comes in, someone will have already
dissected the partition type info for you.

Paul
 
What do you know about the partition types ?

This program can parse the disk contents, and tell you
what is on the disk. For example, if there were FreeBSD partitions
on there, it could tell you.

http://disktype.sourceforge.net/

Once you know the partition type, perhaps a better tool choice
will come to mind.

Hardware with disks inside, would be limited to FAT32. If they
used NTFS, the Microsoft lawyers would be on them immediately.
I think Microsoft went after Garmin, about usage of a Windows
file system. That leaves things like Linux EXT2, or them
choosing something much more exotic, purely for the purpose
of preventing you from copying.

I could use "dd" to copy the disk, but that would take
five or six hours. Even at the best of times, the various
"dd" solutions I've got, never go at "disk rate". I get maybe
half the transfer rate, to as low as 13MB/sec in some
cases. I'm not going to recommend that, because your existing
tools will beat that benchmark.

What you want, is a utility that recognizes the partition type,
and only copies the sectors with data in them. A so-called
Intelligent Copy.

*******

And lists like this, don't appear to be complete.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disk_cloning_software

*******

Perhaps if you hit up Google search with the make and model
of the box the disk comes in, someone will have already
dissected the partition type info for you.

Paul
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll do some looking later. Meanwhile, here's what I know
about the drives and how they are set up.

No matter what size disk is used, the first partition is 517.69 MB,
the second one 15.01 GB, and the third one whatever is left on the
disk.

Easeus reports the file system in each partition as "Other"... but
Easeus dutifully will clone each partition to another drive.

Windows (computer management) Reports basically the same size
information, calls each partition healthy and primary.

Acronis labels the partion as 0x83 (Linux native).

I'll post back later if I find anything else from doing some
searching.
 
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:33:49 -0600, Charlie Hoffpauir

Thanks, I'll do some looking later. Meanwhile, here's what I know
about the drives and how they are set up.

No matter what size disk is used, the first partition is 517.69 MB,
the second one 15.01 GB, and the third one whatever is left on the
disk.

Easeus reports the file system in each partition as "Other"... but
Easeus dutifully will clone each partition to another drive.

Windows (computer management) Reports basically the same size
information, calls each partition healthy and primary.

Acronis labels the partion as 0x83 (Linux native).

I'll post back later if I find anything else from doing some
searching.
Click to expand...

I found a few interesting threads, one mentioned that the file system
was Linux xfs. I don't know Linux, but have played with an
installation of Ubuntu several years ago. The poster who mentioned xfs
also said that probably xfs was chosen by DirecTV to make it hard to
copy the files.
 
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:33:49 -0600, Charlie Hoffpauir



I found a few interesting threads, one mentioned that the file system
was Linux xfs. I don't know Linux, but have played with an
installation of Ubuntu several years ago. The poster who mentioned xfs
also said that probably xfs was chosen by DirecTV to make it hard to
copy the files.
Click to expand...

A bit more searcing for clone software to clone xfs led me to a web
site for Clonezilla, which claims to save and restore only used blocks
on the drive, and also claims to support xfs file system.

I'll give that a try when I have some time.
 
Charlie said:
A bit more searcing for clone software to clone xfs led me to a web
site for Clonezilla, which claims to save and restore only used blocks
on the drive, and also claims to support xfs file system.

I'll give that a try when I have some time.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a good choice.

83 has multiple definitions, and is a basic "Linux data".
So once 83 is detected, the file system has to "taste" the
header to figure out what it is exactly.

http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types-1.html

The 512MB one could be Linux Swap 0x82. That's like the pagefile
in Windows.

The 15GB might be a Linux OS partition. Presumably it
doesn't have that many files in it though.

Idle speculation,
Paul
 
I've used Acronis and Easeus, with a lot more success cloning
a 1 TB to another 1 TB with Easeus, but it takes a LONG time, 5-6
hours.
Click to expand...

These numbers seem twice as high as they should be.

I'm not sure what type of hard drive you are using, but my 3 tb Western Digital Red drives have a sustained average read and write speed of about 112 mb/s, which is well below the SATA 3 connection speed of 300 mb/s. Copying 1 tb of data from a WD Red to another WD Red should take about 2.5 hours.

There's a bottleneck in your system that has nothing to do with the hard drives.
 
These numbers seem twice as high as they should be.

I'm not sure what type of hard drive you are using, but my 3 tb Western Digital Red drives have a sustained average read and write speed of about 112 mb/s, which is well below the SATA 3 connection speed of 300 mb/s. Copying 1 tb of data from a WD Red to another WD Red should take about 2.5 hours.

There's a bottleneck in your system that has nothing to do with the hard drives.
Click to expand...

No, it's not a system bottleneck. Any of the 1 TB drives I've used
have been used in computer service as data drives in my win 7 system,
and they work just fine. Copying files from one to another go at the
expected speeds. It's the cloning process that is incredibly slow,
because it's necessary to do a sector by sector copy of every bit,
whether it holds data or not, and that's just a slow process.
Incidentally, although I failed to mention it before, all these are
SATA II or III drives connected to the motherboard SATA controller
(which is only SATA II). Some are 7200 RPM drives, but some are the
new "variable speed" drives.

I'm trying a new (to me) software now, cloning a 1 TB Hitachi to a 2
TB WD green. It'a been running for 3:47 now, and it still has 1:24 to
go. That works out to about 5 1/2 hours, just about what I get from
the free Easeus (this cost me about $US 24.00), but the vendor claims
that more expensive version will copy faster. The only advantage so
far is that Easeus renders my computer un-usable while the copy is
going, and this runs in the background, so I can answer mail, etc. Of
course, I still have to verify that the cloned copy actually works in
the DVR after the process is complete.
 
Incidentally, although I failed to mention it before, all these are
SATA II or III drives connected to the motherboard SATA controller
(which is only SATA II). Some are 7200 RPM drives, but some are the
new "variable speed" drives.

I'm trying a new (to me) software now, cloning a 1 TB Hitachi to a 2
TB WD green. It'a been running for 3:47 now, and it still has 1:24 to
go. That works out to about 5 1/2 hours, just about what I get from
the free Easeus (this cost me about $US 24.00), but the vendor claims
that more expensive version will copy faster.
Click to expand...


I use Norton Ghost. Enterprise and extracted the DOS portion for a
boot arbitrator -- in MSDOS 6.2 to restore the OS, only, to another
partition.

Let's see - takes me 45 seconds, copy-time, natively (no Winderz
manufacturer's chipset drivers) from platters to a SSD. Roughly twice
that from platter-to-platter.

800Meg WinOS on the "lean side" - all programs, OS linked, but
installed elsewhere. Out of sight, man.

800M/45seconds = 18Meg a second or half that in former scenarios.
Pretty abysmal for plunging into, during those 45seconds, to think of
it - when I could, theoretically, be running x6 faster for a 8 second
OS backup at 120Meg/sec thruput.

OilCan Henry's still offering cheap oil-changes? Maybe I should check
in for a sick tongue in between 2 to 4 weeks regular OS backups on
these Gigabyte MBs.

(Stuff you're doing, I do via USB docking stations. Occasional bulk
movements @15M/sec. Means a 115V fan, Walmart mini-copy of a
commercial all-metal Patton fan, set on low, regardless of using a
black or green HD. Preferably an out-of-house or sleep job I don't
want to watch looking at, past anticipating, planning and correcting
for least defragmention.)

Or maybe I'll relax with a roaster, grinder, LaPavoni, make a
hair-raising latte to reflect back on pre-video, Golden Days of a
dumpster-full of 1.2M floppies and Q80 tapes.
 
I use Norton Ghost. Enterprise and extracted the DOS portion for a
boot arbitrator -- in MSDOS 6.2 to restore the OS, only, to another
partition.

Let's see - takes me 45 seconds, copy-time, natively (no Winderz
manufacturer's chipset drivers) from platters to a SSD. Roughly twice
that from platter-to-platter.

800Meg WinOS on the "lean side" - all programs, OS linked, but
installed elsewhere. Out of sight, man.

800M/45seconds = 18Meg a second or half that in former scenarios.
Pretty abysmal for plunging into, during those 45seconds, to think of
it - when I could, theoretically, be running x6 faster for a 8 second
OS backup at 120Meg/sec thruput.

OilCan Henry's still offering cheap oil-changes? Maybe I should check
in for a sick tongue in between 2 to 4 weeks regular OS backups on
these Gigabyte MBs.

(Stuff you're doing, I do via USB docking stations. Occasional bulk
movements @15M/sec. Means a 115V fan, Walmart mini-copy of a
commercial all-metal Patton fan, set on low, regardless of using a
black or green HD. Preferably an out-of-house or sleep job I don't
want to watch looking at, past anticipating, planning and correcting
for least defragmention.)

Or maybe I'll relax with a roaster, grinder, LaPavoni, make a
hair-raising latte to reflect back on pre-video, Golden Days of a
dumpster-full of 1.2M floppies and Q80 tapes.
Click to expand...

I shouldn't be complaining about 5 1/2 hours to clone a terabyte,
considering that when I started I had to toggle in a boot loader then
load from punched paper tape before I could do anything on a PDP 8i.
 
I shouldn't be complaining about 5 1/2 hours to clone a terabyte,
considering that when I started I had to toggle in a boot loader then
load from punched paper tape before I could do anything on a PDP 8i.
Click to expand...

Been awhile for me since video editing compilations, although I still
enjoy pulling out to watch some earlier projects I've kept. Well
worth time constraints and characteristics for storage advancements
present today.
 
Back
Top