Image file size is 10 times larger than actual disk size
Windows XP SP2 with 250Gb Sata Drive NTFS partion.
Before attempting to fix a very slow running system, I decided to do a full backup - JUST IN CASE. Using TI2009. The used space on the drive was less than 19GB, but the image file size on the backup external drive (USB) was 138Gb. I tried restoring to another SATA drive so as not to "damage" the original, and the resultant drive size used space was only 18Gb.
So, I tried the same thing using TI 11, with basically the same results. The image file was significantly larger, and very close to the results noted above.
When I saw the real large file size, I first suspected a compressed disk, which would also explain the real long Windows startup. But checking the disk, and actual file sizes, I don't think that is the case anymore.
I did note that during the restore process setup, it indicated that it would do a sector by sector restore, even though it was not set in the backup operation. So, what am I doing wrong?
Hello,
Jim, Mark is absolutely correct.
There are 2 possible reasons of such behavior.
- Corrupted file system;
- Sector-by-sector backup.
To make sure that file system errors is not the issue I may suggest you to check the drive for the errors:
- Go to the Command Line (Start-Run -> cmd);
- Enter the following command:
chkdsk DISK: /r
where DISK is the partition letter you need to check. Please note, that checking the C: drive may require you to reboot the machine.
Additionally, please make sure that the mark Create and image using sector-by-sector approach is not checked.
Please reply to this thread if you need any further assistance.
Mark, thanks for your help.
