Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

User discussion and information resource forum for TeraByte Drive Image products, including TBNetManage.
EdBrady
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:33 pm

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by EdBrady »

The 'align to target' option only appears when you restore an entire drive. How do you get properly aligned partitions when you restore backups of individual partitions?
DrTeeth
Posts: 1289
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by DrTeeth »

On Sat, 9 Mar 2013 17:33:43 PST, just as I was about to take a herb,
TeraByte Support(PP) disturbed my reverie and wrote:

>So it forces the alignment regardless of the alignment used on the source drive.

I would suggest that 'align to target' does not need to be a separate
option as it would be understood* if 'align to 2048' were selected -
don't need two options for the same thing IMHO.

* in the grammatical sense.
--

Cheers

DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).
Brian K
Posts: 2720
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by Brian K »

DrT,

"Align to Target – If you select this option, Image for DOS will force alignment to the target drive regardless of the alignment used on the source drive. For example, if the Align Partitions on 2048 Sectors global option is enabled the restored drive will be aligned to 2048 sectors. If this option is not selected, the alignment used on the target drive will be determined automatically based on the source drive."
DrTeeth
Posts: 1289
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by DrTeeth »

On Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:52:11 PDT, just as I was about to take a herb,
Brian K disturbed my reverie and wrote:

>"Align to Target - If you select this option, Image for DOS will force alignment to the target drive regardless of the alignment used on the source drive. For example, if the Align Partitions on 2048 Sectors global option is enabled the restored drive will be aligned to 2048 sectors. If this option is not selected, the alignment used on the target drive will be determined automatically based on the source drive."

This seems to confirm that the align to target is not required as a
separate option. If Align to 2048 is selected, I expect that to be
done, period, without having to change other options (the first option
can changes the others under the hood but it should not need to be a
user action. Without that option selected (the align 2048) I would
expect the target alignment to be used.

Surely, the only alignment that one would want to force is 2048. I
have set up all my HDs up for this.
--

Cheers

DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).
TeraByte Support
Posts: 4106
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:37 pm

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by TeraByte Support »

The Align to Target option is needed if you want to change the alignment of
an entire drive restore. Otherwise as one would expect, the entire drive
restore will restore it as it was when backed up.

As far as single partition restores, those are aligned to the target
already.

"DrTeeth" wrote in message news:[email protected]...

On Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:52:11 PDT, just as I was about to take a herb,
Brian K disturbed my reverie and wrote:

>"Align to Target - If you select this option, Image for DOS will force
>alignment to the target drive regardless of the alignment used on the
>source drive. For example, if the Align Partitions on 2048 Sectors global
>option is enabled the restored drive will be aligned to 2048 sectors. If
>this option is not selected, the alignment used on the target drive will be
>determined automatically based on the source drive."

This seems to confirm that the align to target is not required as a
separate option. If Align to 2048 is selected, I expect that to be
done, period, without having to change other options (the first option
can changes the others under the hood but it should not need to be a
user action. Without that option selected (the align 2048) I would
expect the target alignment to be used.

Surely, the only alignment that one would want to force is 2048. I
have set up all my HDs up for this.
--

Cheers

DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).

EdBrady
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:33 pm

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by EdBrady »

TeraByte Support wrote:
> As far as single partition restores, those are aligned to the target
> already.

You mean with the global 'align to 2048' option? That's the part I've missed until now, and individual partition restores have not been aligned to the target.
TeraByte Support
Posts: 4106
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:37 pm

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by TeraByte Support »

If you enable the global align to 2048 option and do a single partition to
restore to a drive using global options then it will be 2048 aligned.

If you do an entire drive restore to a drive using global options, all
partitions will be 2048 aligned if you choose the align to target option,
otherwise it's aligned to match the original drive.


"EdBrady" wrote in message news:[email protected]...

TeraByte Support wrote:
> As far as single partition restores, those are aligned to the target
> already.

You mean with the global 'align to 2048' option? That's the part I've
missed until now, and individual partition restores have not been aligned to
the target.

EdBrady
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:33 pm

Re: Performance issue on WinXP after restore to new drive

Post by EdBrady »

Thank you -- that makes it clear.
Post Reply