Another bug which has not been fixed in ATI 2011 Build 6696
I really like the automatic file name generation by template which has been introduced in ATI 2011 or 2010.
But unfortunately it does not work as expected for incremental file based backups.
It works as long as I do not delete some of the latest versions in the backup chain.
If I delete -for example- the last version and after that start a new backup, the name of this new backup will not use the filename generation template.
For example:
I use the following template for my backup file names.
MyBackup_@date@_@time@
this will generate the following file names:
MyBackup_2011-02-02_1810
MyBackup_2011-02-05_1350
MyBackup_2011-02-08_1758
MyBackup_2011-02-10_1001
MyBackup_2011-02-10_1023
Today (2011.02.12) I deleted the last two versions and after that started a new incremental backup.
According to the file name generation template the new name should look as follows:
MyBackup_2011-02-12_1120
but the following file name was created.
MyBackup_2011-02-08_1759
So I deleted the last version and tried again - with the same result.
To resolve this issue I had the recreate the file name generation template by editing the backups settings.


- Log in to post comments

The problem is the generated name after template expansion ending in number. Try to use something like MyBackup_@date@_@time@D for, e.g. , disk backups (like abr 10 does for its autogenerated name)
- Log in to post comments

Hi dev-anon,
thanks for the tip - I will try it out.
But this is just another workaround to get rid of a bug (one of myriads).
Meanwhile, I have collected so many tips that I seriously think about writing a book.
I would title it: Working with Banana Software Part1: Acronis True Image Home 2011
I think Acronis should start fixing all this bugs - shouldn't they?
- Log in to post comments

@Dev-anon,
Arumba is right. I have observed that bug as well, at least in build 6597. Haven't tried yet with 6696. If you delete some incremental and restart the backup, the naming ignores the stamps and reverts to incrementing a counter at the end. So, you are right, when the last characters were previously a time stamp, it see a number and increments that number, but this is not what it should do: it should update the time stamps, wherever they are in the name.
- Log in to post comments

Hello all,
Thank you for posting and your help.
I got in touch with our Testing team and they were able to reproduce this issue. I am sorry for the inconvenience but I will keep you posted about the progress on this issue.
Please let me know if you need additional help.
Thank you.
- Log in to post comments
