Mirroring w/ Casper XP

[Guest]

For Timothy Daniels

I ran into a problem that I can't figure out. I will brief you in what I
have done.

-I installed Casper XP on the OLD hard drive.

-Shut down and installed the NEW hard drive.

-According to the factory settings, my OLD hard drive jumpers is set for
Cable Select. I then read the Western Digital documentation that the NEW hard
drive should also be set as Cable Select regardless if it's going to be a
Slave or Master.

-Booted up PC and Bios regconized the NEW hard drive.

-Executed Casper XP (Create Drive)

-Being a DOS oldie, I figured I had to partition my NEW hard drive into the
number of drives I wanted (which is 3) before I could do a Copy Drive. I
partitioned the first one using 40 GB. Thus this gave me about 112 GB left.
Then I realized that I didn't have to partition the drives yet.

- I then ran Casper XP Copy Drive

- I checked the NTFS format
- Enabled File and Folder Compression

- I proceded to copy my OLD hard drive over to my NEW hard drive as
instructed.

-After copy completed, I then checked the partition that is left over.
Apparantly it only shows one drive being partitioned and that is the one that
Copy Drive created...or did it?

-I went ahead and partition the remaining 112 GB in to partition 2 and 3. I
have verified that the Copy Drive (mirrored disk) is labeled as partition 1.

-I shut down and disconnected the OLD hard drive.

-Boot up PC and the Bios configured the NEW hard drive as a primary disk.

After a few seconds, the disk had an error and said it could not read a boot
sector or something like that. So the boot up did not work.

-So I shut down and reconnected the OLD hard drive and it booted up find.

I did some additional checking and I noticed one thing that confused me...my
OLD hard drive had 18.4 GB used space while my NEW hard drive had only 14.2
GB used space.

Something went wrong and I know it must be something on my end.

Appreciate any help you can give.

Eddie

 

[Timothy Daniels]

For Timothy Daniels

I ran into a problem that I can't figure out. I will brief you in what I
have done.

-I installed Casper XP on the OLD hard drive.

-Shut down and installed the NEW hard drive.

-According to the factory settings, my OLD hard drive jumpers
is set for Cable Select. I then read the Western Digital docu-
mentation that the NEW hard drive should also be set as
Cable Select regardless if it's going to be a Slave or Master.

-Booted up PC

The PC booted up because the old HD was at the end
of the cable and thus was made Master and the new HD
at the mid-point was made Slave by virtue of the Cable
Select mode, and the BIOS's default HD boot order
puts the Master ahead of the Slave (if both HDs are on
the same IDE channel (i.e. same cable).
Keep that in mind for later.

and Bios regconized the NEW hard drive.

-Executed Casper XP (Create Drive)

Casper XP would have made a new partition for you
of the same size as the old partition or to fill up the
new HD. Only if you wanted specify a different size
than "same" or "all" would you have to have created
a new partition yourself. (Check me on that.)

-Being a DOS oldie, I figured I had to partition my NEW
hard drive into the number of drives I wanted (which is 3)
before I could do a Copy Drive. I partitioned the first one
using 40 GB. Thus this gave me about 112 GB left.
Then I realized that I didn't have to partition the drives yet.

- I then ran Casper XP Copy Drive

- I checked the NTFS format
- Enabled File and Folder Compression

Oooops. I have no idea what effect that has on an
operating system, but you might as well copy the
old OS byte-for-byte if you're making a clone - since
a "clone" is by definition a byte-for-byte copy.

- I proceded to copy my OLD hard drive over to my NEW
hard drive as instructed.

-After copy completed, I then checked the partition that is
left over. Apparantly it only shows one drive being partitioned
and that is the one that Copy Drive created...or did it?

Disk Management should show a new partition that
is marked "active". You can look at the contents of
that partition and browse around in it with no problems.
Just don't boot it up, yet. The contents of the new
partition should look just like the old partition's contents,
i.e. that of a WinXP system.

-I went ahead and partition the remaining 112 GB in to
partition 2 and 3. I have verified that the Copy Drive
(mirrored disk) is labeled as partition 1.

-I shut down and disconnected the OLD hard drive.

Good!


-Boot up PC and the Bios configured the NEW hard drive
as a primary disk.

The BIOS saw the new HD as being at the head of the
HD boot order because it was the only HD connected.
It therefor passed control to that HD's Master Boot
Record (MBR).

After a few seconds, the disk had an error and said it could
not read a boot sector or something like that. So the boot up
did not work.

The MBR that is found on the HD that is at the head of the
BIOS's HD boot order passes control to the boot sector
that exists on the "active" primary partition. That boot
sector then executes ntldr which it expects to find just under
the root of the file structure.

Check to see that the new partition that contains the new
OS is both primary and "active". Use Disk Management
to do this (rt-clk MyComputer/Manage/DiskManagement).
That utility puts a black border around primary partitions
and a blue border around extended partitions. To find if a
partition is marked "active", rt-clk on its representation in
the GUI, and see if you have the option to make it "active"
If you don't, it's already "active". I suspect that you will find
that the the new partition is both primary and "active". If
that is the case, I'd suspect the file compression to have
confused the boot process. That would mean that you
should try the Copy Drive again, but without the file
compression.

-So I shut down and reconnected the OLD hard drive and it booted
up find.

I did some additional checking and I noticed one thing that confused
me...my OLD hard drive had 18.4 GB used space while my NEW
hard drive had only 14.2 GB used space.

Probably the file compression.

Something went wrong and I know it must be something on my end.

Try it again without the file compression. If you delete the
new partition, there will be "unallocated space" left, and
Casper XP can be told to make a new partition in that
unallocated space. Just be sure that there is enough room
in that unallocated space to put the contents of the old
partition.

Appreciate any help you can give.

After you have started up the new clone for the first time
in solitude, you can thereafter boot either the old or the
new OS be reversing the HD boot order in the BIOS
(easy) or by reversing their order on the cable (a pain),
and you can drag 'n drop files and folders between the
two file structures for easy file-by-file backups.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Guest]

I went ahead and started over.

I first deleted all partitions.

I then did a Copy Drive. Note: It did not give me any option to enable
Files and Folders Compression. I think this option only occured when you
partition the drives itself.)

I then partitioned the remaining space.

I went ahead and check the partition to see if it's 'active' and it is. But
I notice the same problem as before. The OLD drive disk space used is not the
same as the NEW drive. See below:

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 18.44 gb Free = 18.82 gb

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 14.25 gb Free = 23.01 gb

I have not booted up to the NEW drive yet. I wanted your thoughts on this.

Eddie

 

[Guest]

I went ahead and rebooted to the NEW hard drive. I found that the culprit was
the CD-ROM was set as primary instead of secondary. Making that change worked
out perfectly.

I still have a problem about the disk used/free space. The first is before I
booted the NEW drive:

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 18.44 gb Free = 18.82 gb
NEW drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 14.25 gb Free = 23.01 gb

After boot:

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 18.44 gb Free = 18.82 gb
NEW drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 16.74 gb Free = 20.52 gb

Still trying to figure out why NEW drive has 1.70 gb less than the OLD drive.

Also, if I want to keep my clone the same as my original such as adding new
software that I add, what method should I use? Casper's Copy Drive? Drag and
drop? Or install the software for each drive seperately.

I assume that the latter method is what you suggest but I wanted to be
certain if that was the only option.

I really appreciate you effort and support in getting me up and going with a
new cloned drive. Now if I ever have a crash, I will not have to worry about
down time.

THANK YOU!

 

[Timothy Daniels]

I went ahead and started over.

I first deleted all partitions.

I then did a Copy Drive. Note: It did not give me any option
to enable Files and Folders Compression. I think this option
only occured when you partition the drives itself.)

I then partitioned the remaining space.

I went ahead and check the partition to see if it's 'active' and
it is. But I notice the same problem as before. The OLD drive
disk space used is not the same as the NEW drive. See below:

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 18.44 gb Free = 18.82 gb

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 14.25 gb Free = 23.01 gb

I have not booted up to the NEW drive yet. I wanted your thoughts on this.

Open the windows, cover your ears, and boot the sucker up!
I don't think the apparent difference in size matters.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Timothy Daniels]

I went ahead and rebooted to the NEW hard drive. I found
that the culprit was the CD-ROM was set as primary instead
of secondary. Making that change worked out perfectly.

Interesting. In my BIOS, if the CD is set as the 1st boot
device, the BIOS will still go to the HD list if the CD is
not there.

I still have a problem about the disk used/free space. The first
is before I booted the NEW drive:

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 18.44 gb Free = 18.82 gb
NEW drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 14.25 gb Free = 23.01 gb

After boot:

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 18.44 gb Free = 18.82 gb
NEW drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 16.74 gb Free = 20.52 gb

Still trying to figure out why NEW drive has 1.70 gb less than the OLD drive.

There could have been some compaction in the way that
the sectors were copied if the two drives aren't identical
in size and position of the partitions. That's just my guess.

Also, if I want to keep my clone the same as my original such as
adding new software that I add, what method should I use?
Casper's Copy Drive? Drag and drop? Or install the software
for each drive seperately.

If the software to be installed is large (such as Visual Studio .NET)
just do a periodic cloning (i.e. "Copy Drive"). It's a lot easier than
installing twice. If you want to do a daily backup of your email
or entire Outlook Express folder collection, just do a drag 'n drop
of the entire folder. For such a simple backup strategy, Casper XP
will work fine. If you want a more complex utility that does
incremental backups of individual files, on a schedule, to optical
media or to USB external drives, use something like Ghost or
True Image that have all the bells and whistles. I, personally, like
the simplicity of Casper XP. BTW, you can do Windows Updates
and Norton Anti-Virus/Personal Firewall updates to clones just
as easily and in the same way as for the original OS.

Once you get into cloning, you might want to try a removable tray
for your backup drive, maybe even 2 - one for the source, one for
destination. Being able to just turn off the power to make the
"parent" OS disappear - which you can do with a removable tray -
is a great convenience. I do the same with a SPDT micro toggle
switch in the internal HD's power wires, and that accomplishes
the same thing, but it does involve a lot of juggling and filing to
make the switch both easily accessible and not look like a kludge.

You may also want to put multiple copies of the OS on the backup
HD as I do. That way you can "go back" to various states of the
OS (and all the files) in the past. It does take a good understanding
of the boot.ini syntax to keep them all bootable via menu selection,
though.

I assume that the latter method is what you suggest but I wanted to be
certain if that was the only option.

I really appreciate you effort and support in getting me up and going
with a new cloned drive. Now if I ever have a crash, I will not have to
worry about down time.

THANK YOU!

Hey, don't *thank* me. I just turned you into a cloning junky!

*TimDaniels*

 

[dg1261]

OLD drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 18.44 gb Free = 18.82 gb
NEW drive --> Total = 37.26 gb Used = 16.74 gb Free = 20.52 gb

Still trying to figure out why NEW drive has 1.70 gb less than the OLD
drive.

My experience with CasperXP is that it's really a file copier, not a true
cloner, so I wonder if what you're seeing could be something about the way
CasperXP copies certain files, such as the "System Information" folder. On
the new drive, are all your restore points in System Restore the same as
what were available on the old drive?

 

[Timothy Daniels]

:
My experience with CasperXP is that it's really a file copier,
not a true cloner, ....

If Casper XP copied files, why does the clone retain
its "parent's" previous fragmentation? Wouldn't the
copying process degragment the files as they were
copied? (That's a genuine question, BTW.)

*TimDaniels*

 

[Guest]

My experience with CasperXP is that it's really a file copier, not a true
cloner, so I wonder if what you're seeing could be something about the way
CasperXP copies certain files, such as the "System Information" folder. On
the new drive, are all your restore points in System Restore the same as
what were available on the old drive?

Upon booting up the NEW clone hard drive, everything is as exactly as it
were with the OLD drive. As Tim mentioned, it's good to create a shortcut for
each drive giving a name to identify which drive I am on. Otherwise, I could
not tell them apart (other than the used/free space difference)

All the programs works perfectly. All the settings are the same.
Profiles...preferences, etc. are the same. Connects to my Linksys and
internet connect the same as the OLD drive. Email works perfectly.

Why the 1.7 gb difference? I don't no. Maybe dead space that was treated as
used but Casper was smart enough to ignore that?

Is there a Casper XP forum? Probably not, so I will send them an email
posting my findings to them and see if they have an answer.

Otherwise....IT WORKS!!!

 

[Guest]

I emailed Casper XP support and within an hour I got a response which
satisfied my curiousity about the missing 'used' space. The following I quote
the Casper XP technical support person's email to me:

--------------------------------start quote-----------------------
A difference in expected space utilization (and also file and folder counts)
can be caused by a number of things, including the Windows swap file,
hibernation file, other temporary and instance specific files, or even the
cluster size or file system format of the source and destination.

As an optimization, Casper XP actually excludes the Windows swap file and
hibernation file when cloning a drive on which Windows is running. The swap
file is a temporary file used by Windows to manage virtual memory and is
created on demand when needed. Likewise, the hibernation file is also a
temporary file used by Windows to hibernate the computer and is created on
demand when needed. Depending on the amount of RAM installed in the computer,
both of these files can be extremely large. The size of a hibernation file is
typically equal to the amount of RAM installed. The size
of a swap file is typically much greater than the amount of RAM installed (3
or 4 times the size is not atypical).

In addition, Casper XP will exclude the GoBack history file when GoBack is
in use, as well as certain files within the System Volume Information folder
when necessary. Primarily these files represent system restore points
specific to the original disk configuration which should not be included.
(Sometimes, these can represent a considerable amount of space.)

Other observable differences may include possibly new or changed files in
the logged-in user Temp folder and Windows temp folder. Depending on your
system setup, services and utilities running under Windows may be changing,
creating, and removing temporary or state files so it may be impossible
to find an exact byte utilization match on an active system drive -- i.e.
it's a moving target in that respect. When cloning a drive, Casper XP
actually begins by taking a snapshot or "picture" of the drive and then
clones the snapshot. This ensures a stable, point-in-time image of the drive
is cloned. (The newest version of Ghost, another popular drive imaging
solution, recently introduced a similar capability that they call “hot
imagingâ€.)

If Casper XP has any trouble during the cloning process, it will log the
problem as well as any affected files and/or directories in the Exceptions
section of the Activity Report that is generated at the completion of the
cloning process. Casper XP will also alert you to these exceptions in the
Finish step of the Copy Drive wizard.
-----------------------------------------end quote-----------------------

Makes sense to me but if you differ otherwise, love to hear your input.

 

[dg1261]

All the programs works perfectly. All the settings are the same.
Profiles...preferences, etc. are the same. Connects to my Linksys and
internet connect the same as the OLD drive. Email works perfectly.

Why the 1.7 gb difference? I don't no. Maybe dead space that was treated
as
used but Casper was smart enough to ignore that?

Otherwise....IT WORKS!!!

I never said it didn't work. And FTR, it cannot be exactly identical or it
would NOT work. My experience was that it copied the files and made the
subtle changes required so the copy would appear to work just like the
original. And after all, that's what you really want--not an exact copy,
but a copy that works exactly like the original.

But you didn't answer my question, which was: are your system restore points
exactly the same? I don't know what the answer to that should be, and it
doesn't matter to me. But you seemed to be bothered by the 1.7GB
difference, so I thought I'd offer a suggestion of where you might look for
a difference.

 

[dg1261]

If Casper XP copied files, why does the clone retain
its "parent's" previous fragmentation? Wouldn't the
copying process degragment the files as they were
copied? (That's a genuine question, BTW.)

Does it retain the fragmentation now? Then that's different from my
experience, in which you could copy from FAT32 to NTFS or vice versa, and
the copy was defragmented. But my experience was with a prior version, so
maybe they've changed the underlying process.

 

[Uncle John]

My experience with CasperXP over three years now is that if disk to disk
copy is used and the drives are the same size the copy is a clone. If the
destination drive is larger Casper fills up the empty space.

 

[Timothy Daniels]

Does it retain the fragmentation now? Then that's different
from my experience, in which you could copy from FAT32 to NTFS
or vice versa, and the copy was defragmented. But my experience
was with a prior version, so maybe they've changed the underlying
process.

If the formatting were changed in the copy process, it would
*have* to be done file-by-file. But in the current Casper XP,
the formatting is transferred along with the data, and I see the
same file fragmentation in the clone as in the "parent",
suggesting that the utility doesn't copy files but rather sectors -
as one would expect for cloning. Whether some hybrid
between the two ways of copying is done, I don't know.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Timothy Daniels]

I emailed Casper XP support and within an hour I got a response which
satisfied my curiousity about the missing 'used' space....

That's an amazingly quick reply. It sure beats Symantec.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Timothy Daniels]

My experience with CasperXP over three years now is that if disk to disk
copy is used and the drives are the same size the copy is a clone. If the
destination drive is larger Casper fills up the empty space.

My copy, which I purchased a month ago, gives the option to
make a partition of the same size as the source partition or
to fill up the available space on the destination HD. It might
be a new feature.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Uncle John]

Timothy

Yes that is an additional feature.

 

[Guest]

Yo Tim,

Whats an online store for buying these removable trays for hard drives? Do
they fit in the 5.25 or 3.5 slots. I would like to try this method.

 

[Timothy Daniels]

These "mobile racks", "removable trays", "HD caddies"
fit into a standard 5 1/4" PC bay. They usually have a
handle that acts as a lever to push the tray into the slot
to engage the connectors. Many have a key switch
that locks the tray in place and controls the power.

After a long search, I settled on a model made by Kingwin.
Kingwin's "mobile racks" are cast aluminum, which holds
its shape and size over time, and it improves cooling by
conduction, and they come in a variety of fan configurations
and finishes. The one I got, model KF-101-IPF, has the fan
in the bottom of the tray so it pulls fresh air in the front and
then directly over the circuit card. The site seems to be
down at the moment, but try www.Kingwin.com later on
and click on IDE Mobile Racks under Products.
Nextag.com shows them currently going for between $25
and $27 for the assembly. Expect about half that for extra
trays.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Timothy Daniels]

Once you start stuffing a PC with parallel ATA devices,
the case gets to be a tangle of ribbon cables, some of
which can't reach to both a Master and a Slave device.
I solved the problem with "round" cables. They have
80 wires, each of the 40 data wires twisted together
with a ground wire to help shield the data wire. I use
the kind with an aluminum braid shield to further improve
shielding. They also come in various lengths and in a
one-device form (2 connectors) and a two-device form
(3 connectors). They improve the air flow inside the
case and they help get rid of the "ribbon tangle". They
are sold by hundreds of online retailers, but I found
Silicon Valley Compucycle to have a good combination
of selection and low price:
http://www.svc.com/cables-ata-100-133-round-cables.html .
There are also "round" cables made for floppy drives (if
you happen to *have* a floppy drive).

*TimDaniels*