What is wrong with System Restore?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MaryL
  • Start date Start date
M

MaryL

When I first started to use XP (Home Edition), I thought System Restore was
one of the best computer aids ever developed. I still think it's a
marvel -- *when* it works. The problem is that it frequently does not work,
and there is no way to tell that System Restore is corrupt until it is
needed. Then it's too late! The only thing to do is to turn it off and
then back on, but there no way to get back to the previous state that System
Restore is supposed to create.

What is the problem? This has happened to me many times since I first
started to use XP in November 2002. I have also read numerous messages from
other people who mention the same thing. Is there some solution that I
don't know about? If not, I am now of the opinion that System Restore is
only *barely* advantageous.
 
MaryL said:
When I first started to use XP (Home Edition), I thought System Restore was
one of the best computer aids ever developed. I still think it's a
marvel -- *when* it works. The problem is that it frequently does not work,
and there is no way to tell that System Restore is corrupt until it is
needed. Then it's too late! The only thing to do is to turn it off and
then back on, but there no way to get back to the previous state that System
Restore is supposed to create.
Click to expand...

You need a secondary backup. Frequently recommended here is erunt.zip,
a 575K freeware utility.
http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.hederer/erunt
 
Maureen Goldman said:
You need a secondary backup. Frequently recommended here is erunt.zip,
a 575K freeware utility.
http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.hederer/erunt
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll try it. I already have a separate backup for personal data,
but I see that this backs up and restores the Registry.

One thing I really like about System Restore (except that it is so "buggy")
is that it will restore all programs and settings to a point in time. It
doesn't sound like erunt has this capability ... but, then, I haven't found
System Restore to be reliable.

MaryL
 
MaryL said:
When I first started to use XP (Home Edition), I thought System Restore was
one of the best computer aids ever developed. I still think it's a
marvel -- *when* it works. The problem is that it frequently does not work,
and there is no way to tell that System Restore is corrupt until it is
needed. Then it's too late! The only thing to do is to turn it off and
then back on, but there no way to get back to the previous state that System
Restore is supposed to create.

What is the problem? This has happened to me many times since I first
started to use XP in November 2002. I have also read numerous messages from
other people who mention the same thing. Is there some solution that I
don't know about? If not, I am now of the opinion that System Restore is
only *barely* advantageous.
Click to expand...

You need a partition imaging utility. Before making changes, and
regularly, create an image. If problems arise, or you want to delete a
program that you tested, simply restore the image. EVERY setting, every
file, every program will be as it was - exactly - when the image was created.

http://ghost.com
http://powerquest.com/driveimage
http://WWW.TERABYTEUNLIMITED.COM/
http://PERSO.CLUB-INTERNET.FR/guiboure/en/index.html

There are others. http://google.com can locate them.
 
dev said:
MaryL said:


You need a partition imaging utility. Before making changes, and
regularly, create an image. If problems arise, or you want to delete a
program that you tested, simply restore the image. EVERY setting, every
file, every program will be as it was - exactly - when the image was created.

http://ghost.com
http://powerquest.com/driveimage
http://WWW.TERABYTEUNLIMITED.COM/
http://PERSO.CLUB-INTERNET.FR/guiboure/en/index.html

There are others. http://google.com can locate them.
Click to expand...

I do use Norton Ghost (which may fit what you describe). The negative is
that it takes quite awhile to run, so I don't do it every time I install a
program. System Restore is so quick that I routinely set a new restore
point before I make any change to the computer. It looks like I will need
to make more frequent use of Ghost. (I have two hard disks, so I "ghost" an
image of the C-drive to the D-drive.)

Thanks,
MaryL
 
Maureen Goldman said:
Thanks. I'll try it. I already have a separate backup for personal
data, but I see that this backs up and restores the Registry.

One thing I really like about System Restore (except that it is so
"buggy") is that it will restore all programs and settings to a point
in time. It doesn't sound like erunt has this capability ... but,
then, I haven't found System Restore to be reliable.

MaryL
Click to expand...

Are you really sure it's buggy?
If you use some Reg-cleaners, or delete what appear to be just backups but
in fact are essential files for SR to work, you will have problems for sure.

john
 
john said:
Are you really sure it's buggy?
If you use some Reg-cleaners, or delete what appear to be just backups but
in fact are essential files for SR to work, you will have problems for sure.

john
Click to expand...

No, I haven't done any of those things. The "backups" I mentioned are done
using a basic backup program, and I backup to a floppy. That is used for
personal data (not programs). I also use Norton Ghost and store the images
on the second HD. That makes an image of the entire system. System Restore
isn't designed to selectively delete specific restore points. Instead, I
create a restore point each time I make a major change (such as installation
of a program) so that I could revert to that point if a problem occurs. In
addition, XP regularly creates restore points. However, I find that it
works well for awhile and I have gone "backward in time" when a few programs
did not work correctly. Unfortunately, at those times when I have most
wanted to use System Restore, I sometimes find that it cannot be used.
Other people have posted messages about similar problems and I see
references when I google, so it is not just my system.

MaryL
 
I do use Norton Ghost (which may fit what you describe). The negative is
that it takes quite awhile to run, so I don't do it every time I install a
program. System Restore is so quick that I routinely set a new restore
point before I make any change to the computer. It looks like I will need
to make more frequent use of Ghost. (I have two hard disks, so I "ghost" an
image of the C-drive to the D-drive.)

Thanks,
MaryL
Click to expand...

Mary,
I have finally just gave up on System Restore and just do regular
backups like you are doing. I found it to work correctly only about 1/2 the
time and that is not good enough for me. I recently disabled it completely
on all my drives and save a bit of my resources and drive space.

Ed
 
Hi - there might be a correlation between your anti-virus utilitie's file
cleaning operations and System Restore's restore capability. Let me explain
how anti-virus utilities and SR restore integrity checks combine to prevent
you from restoring to an infected and/or inconsistant state.

During a restore, when a file is detected as infected and your virus utility
must either delete or quarantine it- this process can happen even before SR
completes a restore. During a restore SR always checks that it undoes
exactly the logged operations on monitored files, and these operations
correlate to replacing the exact backed up files when necessary. If a virus
utility deletes or quarantines a file during a restore, SR sees the mismatch
between operations and backup copies, as a corrupt or compromised restore
point. By design the feature will not allow the system to be restored to a
known corrupt or inconsistant restored state, so SR fails that restore
after undoing all the changes done up to the inconsistant point. Since
Restore points are "chained" together change logs - any restore points after
the "compromised" points will also fail.

The FAQ (link attached) has been updated to explain this behaivor. If you
disable then re-enable SR to purge any existing restore points which might
contain infected but non-cleanable, protected files, the problem should be
addressed once SR creates new scheduled or event based restore points.
 
Bobbie Harder (MSFT) said:
Hi - there might be a correlation between your anti-virus utilitie's file
cleaning operations and System Restore's restore capability.

If a virus
utility deletes or quarantines a file during a restore, SR sees the mismatch
between operations and backup copies, as a corrupt or compromised restore
point. By design the feature will not allow the system to be restored to a
known corrupt or inconsistant restored state, so SR fails that restore
after undoing all the changes done up to the inconsistant point.

The FAQ (link attached) has been updated to explain this behaivor. If you
disable then re-enable SR to purge any existing restore points which might
contain infected but non-cleanable, protected files, the problem should be
addressed once SR creates new scheduled or event based restore points.

--
System Restore FAQ:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tr...=/technet/itcommunity/Newsgroups/FAQSRWXP.asp

--
This posting is provided "As Is" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Let me know if this helps- thanks
Bobbie Harder
PM, System Restore
Click to expand...

Thanks for the information. I was not aware of this process, and the
information is very useful. However, I don't think this is the problem
because Norton always alerts me if a file is to be deleted or quarantined
due to virus. That has happened only a few times. It will be worth trying
it (disable and re-enable System Restore) the next time I get a warning from
Norton. The problem is (so far, at least), by the time I realize that none
of the restore points will not work, it is too late -- that is, it's too
late to disable and re-enable because that won't get to the "current"
problem I may be trying to correct.

MaryL
 
Back
Top