IFL-Restore to smaller SSD failure

[JohnH]

Hello,

I'm using the evaluation copy of IFL on a USB flash drive. I've done a image/restore cycle on the spinning hard drive. It worked. I wanted to use IFL to replace the spinning drive with a SSD. The SSD has a smaller capacity at 256GB. Used space on the spinning drive is around 55GB. The partition size is around 493GB. When I try to restore using the 'Scale to Target' option I get the message I don't have enough space on target drive.

Is the evaluation copy crippled in some way that does not allow to restore to a smaller drive?

[TeraByte Support]

See http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=554


"JohnH" wrote in message news:8623@public.image...

Hello,

I'm using the evaluation copy of IFL on a USB flash drive. I've done a
image/restore cycle on the spinning hard drive. It worked. I wanted to use
IFL to replace the spinning drive with a SSD. The SSD has a smaller capacity
at 256GB. Used space on the spinning drive is around 55GB. The partition
size is around 493GB. When I try to restore using the 'Scale to Target'
option I get the message I don't have enough space on target drive.

Is the evaluation copy crippled in some way that does not allow to restore
to a smaller drive?

[JohnH]

I read that article before I posted. I figured I could use method 1 'Normal Restore'. I checked the option 'Scale to Target' as the article said.

[Brian K]

John,

In the above tutorial see the section on "Compact or Resize the Partition(s)". Compact it to 200 GiB.

[JohnH]

The example in the tutorial has a 500GB drive with a single partition. Only 220GB is used. The tutorial says you can use 'Normal Restore Method'.
The 'Scale to Target' option must be checked. This is the same situation I have, just with less data.

I'm confused why I have to resize the partition before I image. The tutorial says it's not needed.

[TeraByte Support(PP)]

The 220GB isn't used space it's the space needed to restore.

The base system configuration used for the example lists the following:
• The source drive is 500GB with a single 465GB partition containing Windows and 150GB of programs and data.
• The source drive’s required space for restore is 220GB.

In scenario #1 the destination SSD is 256GB and will hold the 220GB needed to restore. As a result, a normal restore can be done.

[JohnH]

This is exactly what I'm trying to do. Except instead of 220GB it is 55GB like I said in the OP. Tried normal restore with 'Scale to Target' option
selected, but receive restore too big for target error.

[TeraByte Support(PP)]

What is the reported "MiB to Restore" value for the partition? This is detailed in the "Determining the Space Required" section of the article. This value is what determines the minimum size of the destination partition, not the actual used space. Since the original partition was 493GiB it's normal for it to have used sectors located past what will fit on a 256GiB SSD.

[mjnelson99]

Will a defrag pull the files together so not so spread out on the disk?
Wouldn't that help to move to a smaller drive?
Mary

On 9/5/2014 1:32 PM, PP wrote:
> What is the reported "MiB to Restore" value for the partition?

This is detailed in the "Determining the Space Required" section of the
article.

This value is what determines the minimum size of the destination
partition,

not the actual used space. Since the original partition was 493GiB it's
normal for

it to have used sectors located past what will fit on a 256GiB SSD.
>
>

[TeraByte Support(PP)]

It might in some cases, but often the data in the "high" sectors isn't data that gets moved by a defrag.