Welcome, Guest. Please Login
 
  HomeHelpSearchLogin FAQ Radified Ghost.Classic Ghost.New Bootable CD Blog  
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
Norton Ghost 14 (Read 110496 times)
John.
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 2072


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #45 - Mar 3rd, 2008 at 3:45pm
 
Pleonasm wrote on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 11:41am:
Diskeeper actually optimizes the placement of frequently used files on the hard disk to speed performance,
a function not performed by PerfectDisk
.


I disagree. PerfectDisk separates files into groups of Rarely Modified, Occasionally Modified, and Recently Modified.  The frequently modified files are kept in the partition near the Master File Table (MFT) for better performance.

From the PerfectDisk 2008 Help:
Quote:
Patented File Placement Strategy - PerfectDisk has a patented file placement strategy called SMARTPlacement™ that is designed to slow down the rate of refragmentation and to speed up future defragmentation passes. PerfectDisk accomplishes this via consolidation of free space and by identifying both rarely modified and recently modified files, and grouping them together. SMARTPlacement of files results in your drive maintaining its peak performance longer and reduces the need to frequently run defragmentation passes.


Also see:
PerfectDisk's SMARTPlacement Optimization
http://www.raxco.com/whitepapers/PD_SMARTPlacement.pdf
 

Ghost4me  Ghost 9, 10, 12, 14, 15.  Windows XP, Vista, Windows 7
 
IP Logged
 

Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #46 - Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:35pm
 
Quote:
Are you writing to a faster drive or do you just not have much to back up?

I am using ShadowProtect Desktop for the image backup, reading/writing to 15K RPM SAS hard disks at 50MB/s or better.

Quote:
The frequently modified files are kept in the partition near the Master File Table (MFT) for better performance.

Actually, according to the PerfectDisk white paper you referenced, it is the ”rarely modified” files that are positioned at the front of the disk:  “Rarely Modified files are … defragmented and SMARTPlacement groups them together at the front of the disk … As a result, the Rarely Modified files do not need to be moved.”  Note that “Rarely Modified” files are not the same as “most often accessed (used)” files.

PerfectDisk is optimizing future free space consolidation; Diskeeper, in contrast, is optimizing the actual placement of the files on the parts of the disk platter that provide the fastest access.  As Raxco states, SMARTPlacement “is designed to slow down the rate of refragmentation” – not to speed file access.  Again, the objective of SMARTPlacement isn’t to optimize or accelerate file access, but to use fewer resources in a subsequent defragmentation.

Both Diskeeper and PerfectDisk appear to be excellent products, and each has their own unique advantages and disadvantages.  But, the SMARTPlacement strategy of PerfectDisk bears no resemblance to the IFAAST (“Intelligent File Access Acceleration Sequencing Technology”) technique of Diskeeper, despite the similar nomenclature.
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 
John.
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 2072


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #47 - Mar 3rd, 2008 at 7:28pm
 
You misread the Raxco whitepaper.  The recently/frequently modified files are relocated to the middle of the partition near the MFT for performance, not the front.

See page 4, Master File Table (MFT) / Reserved Zone
" Only PerfectDisk relocates the MFT and its Reserved Zone about 1/3 of the way into the volume in accordance with a Microsoft white paper which states this location delivers a 5-10% performance improvement..."

See page 5, Data Files
"...The Frequently Modified files are positioned between the Occasionally Modified files and the Directory files.  This ares is proximal to the contiguous free space..."
 

Ghost4me  Ghost 9, 10, 12, 14, 15.  Windows XP, Vista, Windows 7
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Wood
Gnarly
*
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 44
Villanova, PA


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #48 - Mar 3rd, 2008 at 7:33pm
 
Pleonasm wrote on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:35pm:
Quote:
Are you writing to a faster drive or do you just not have much to back up?

I am using ShadowProtect Desktop for the image backup, reading/writing to 15K RPM SAS hard disks at 50MB/s or better.


So why do you like ShadowProtect better than NG?
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Wood
Gnarly
*
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 44
Villanova, PA


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #49 - Mar 3rd, 2008 at 8:33pm
 
John. wrote on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 7:28pm:
You misread the Raxco whitepaper.  The recently/frequently modified files are relocated to the middle of the partition near the MFT for performance, not the front.

See page 4, Master File Table (MFT) / Reserved Zone
" Only PerfectDisk relocates the MFT and its Reserved Zone about 1/3 of the way into the volume in accordance with a Microsoft white paper which states this location delivers a 5-10% performance improvement..."

See page 5, Data Files
"...The Frequently Modified files are positioned between the Occasionally Modified files and the Directory files.  This ares is proximal to the contiguous free space..."

Diskeeper actually estimates and then measures the speedups it achieves.  It doesn't use a strategy of putting files at the beginning, middle, or end of the disk - it measures where the fastest spots on the disk are before placing the files for fastest access.  Attached are the results for my disks.  Note the C drive was too small to gain any benefit from IFAAST so Diskeeper disabled IFAAST on the C drive.

The chart shows the estimated and actual performance gains from using IFAAST, as well as the slowest and fastest measured access times on the disk.

Since my 3 partitions are all on the same physical disk, you can see that my Hitachi 7200rpm 200gb Travelstar disk does have better performance at the front of the disk.  The C: drive performs significantly faster than the V drive which is at the end of the disk.
 

diskeeper.jpg (Attachment deleted)
 
IP Logged
 
Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #50 - Mar 4th, 2008 at 5:57pm
 
Ghost4me, your comments in Reply #47 appear to be based upon the assumption that the Frequently Modified Files are the same files that are most often accessed, and that by positioning those Frequently Modified Files appropriately on the disk, a performance gain will be realized.  But the assumption is not necessarily correct.

For example, a user may often launch Excel, but the EXCEL.EXE file is almost never modified.  In this common scenario, PerfectDisk will not optimize the placement of the executable and the user will see no change in performance when using Excel.  Diskeeper, however, will detect that EXCEL.EXE is frequently used, and move that file to the section of the disk that is empirically determined to be the fastest.  See the difference?

Quote:
Diskeeper actually estimates and then measures the speedups it achieves.  It doesn't use a strategy of putting files at the beginning, middle, or end of the disk - it measures where the fastest spots on the disk are before placing the files for fastest access.

Excellent point, Bill.  No two disks behave the same, and Diskeeper wisely determines the areas of the disk that are fastest based upon an empirical examination of an individual disk's performance.  That is the area into which the most frequently used files (applications and/or data) are moved, resulting in the greatest performance gain for the user.  Strictly speaking, this IFAAST approach used by Diskeeper isn’t about defragmentation at all – it is completely about performance; whereas, in contrast, the SMARTPlacement approach by Raxco is all about minimizing fragmentation (and thereby, only indirectly, addresses performance).  It’s a major distinction between the two products.

Quote:
So why do you like ShadowProtect better than NG?

Please see this thread:  http://radified.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1190053581
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 

Bill Wood
Gnarly
*
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 44
Villanova, PA


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #51 - Mar 5th, 2008 at 10:39am
 
Pleonasm wrote on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:35pm:
Quote:
Are you writing to a faster drive or do you just not have much to back up?

I am using ShadowProtect Desktop for the image backup, reading/writing to 15K RPM SAS hard disks at 50MB/s or better.

I'm running a trial version of ShadowProtect and the MB/sec figure it reports is not based on actual MB written to disk (ie the compressed backup size) - its based on the number of MB that are backed up.  I may test NG10 on the same backup to compare speeds of actual MB written to disk with ShadowProtect.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #52 - Mar 6th, 2008 at 4:44pm
 
This is bit off-topic, but . . .

From reading the PerfectDisk 2008 user manual, it seems clear to me that the objective of SMARTPlacement is not to increase disk access performance, but to “slow down the rate of refragmentation and to speed up future defragmentation passes” (page 26) and thereby “minimize refragmentation” (page 86) and “maximizes the speed of subsequent defragmentation passes” (page 202).  There is nothing wrong with that objective, of course; but one shouldn’t confuse it with what Diskeeper seeks to accomplish with its IFAAST technology.

Interestingly, the default SMARTPlacement setting “may leave small blocks of free space” (page 94), which is what occurs with Diskeeper, too.  Apparently, Raxco is beginning to alter its previous position that any block of free space is detrimental to performance, and thereby appears to be migrating closer to the perspective that has been argued by Diskeeper for quite some time:

Quote:
Why doesn't Diskeeper move all of the files into one place on the volume?

Our primary philosophy with Diskeeper is improving and maintaining the performance of  our computer. The disk drives are the primary bottleneck in your computer's performance. Diskeeper restores the disks to top speed by eliminating fragmentation.

It is a common misconception that a defragmented disk should look very neat and tidy in the Volume Map map….

Clearly, the speed of the volume (meaning how fast you can access the data on it) is more important than the prettiness of the display or the consolidation of all the free space into one place. Free space consolidation might be important if the next file that you plan to create needs to be one gigantic contiguous file, but it has no effect on performance. In fact, the operating system may or may not write the next file into a contiguous location—even if there is a large enough space.

Because of this, when using the Quick or Recommended defragmentation methods, Diskeeper uses algorithms that achieve the highest speed from your volumes regardless of the arrangement of the free spaces on the disk and on the screen—and it does so without wasting time on excessive consolidation of free space. We simply go for the fastest possible file access times and then stop.

Even so, you might ask why we don't continue and rearrange the files further to get a neat display? Because it takes computer power to do so. We long ago decided that it would be wrong for Diskeeper to consume more of your computer's performance than it gives back. So Diskeeper defragments until the disk is in top shape performance-wise and then stops.
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 
Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #53 - Mar 6th, 2008 at 4:59pm
 
Quote:
I may test NG10 on the same backup to compare speeds of actual MB written to disk with ShadowProtect.

Bill, I have not run any speed comparisons of Norton Ghost versus ShadowProtect Desktop myself, but one reviewer said:  “I prefer it over all the alternatives {including Norton Ghost}, because it does what it's designed to do with unparalleled speed and reliability.”  The same review states:  “ShadowProtect Desktop performs the same basic functions as True Image Home and Paragon Drive Backup, but it's breathtakingly fast compared with its rivals.”

I’ll be interested to learn what you discover in your own comparative speed tests.

P.S.:  Of course, speed is important - but it is certainly not the only consideration in selecting an image backup solution.
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Wood
Gnarly
*
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 44
Villanova, PA


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #54 - Mar 7th, 2008 at 8:15am
 
Bill Wood wrote on Mar 1st, 2008 at 10:36am:
k4kjf wrote on Mar 1st, 2008 at 8:22am:
Downloaded the Ghost 14 trial version from the Symantec web site a few days ago and purchased a key for it yesterday.  

You have to purchase a product key to get the 170 MB or so .iso file that allows you to make a Recovery Environment boot CDR.

...

My question is this.  According to page 29 of the user guide ( www.norton.com\ngh14guide ) you can make a custom boot CDR that includes drivers specific to your system. However, I cannot find the tabs/buttons etc in the user interface that allow me to do this.  Has anyone else been successful in making an SRD this way?  (In my instllation there is no "Create Recovery Disks" option under "Tasks" as the manual seems to state???)

BTW, I'm running off the trial installation which I activated with the purchased product key.  When I purchased the key, I was offered another installation file and I did download it, but it is the same size and name as the one I originally installed, so didn't bother with it.  

The About display states that I have version 14.0.1.24977

Ken


I have the same version as you, I do have the option under Tasks to Create Recovery Disk.

I purchased mine outright without using the trial.  The filename was NGH140_AllWin_EnglishTryBuy30.exe

Why don't you try uninstalling and reinstalling?

- Bill


I just discovered, you cannot create the recovery disk from the "Advanced" tab.  Go to one of the other tabs then the option to create a recovery disk should be under the Tasks menu.
 
 
IP Logged
 
John.
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 2072


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #55 - Mar 7th, 2008 at 8:17am
 
Pleonasm wrote on Mar 6th, 2008 at 4:44pm:
Interestingly, the default SMARTPlacement setting “may leave small blocks of free space” (page 94), which is what occurs with Diskeeper, too.  Apparently,
Raxco is beginning to alter its previous position
that any block of free space is detrimental to performance, and thereby appears to be migrating closer to the perspective that has been argued by Diskeeper for quite some time


I disagree.  That feature (leaving small blocks of free space to enhance performance) was added quite some time ago by Raxco in PerfectDisk -- at least 5+ years ago.  I've forgotten which release number.  But, I think it was sometime between when Windows 2000 Pro and XP were released.  I used/evaluated  both Diskeeper and PerfectDisk in 2000 with both Windows 98 and Windows 2000 pc's.  PerfectDisk won the Ghost4me-Editor's-Choice award!

Maybe Diskeeper "borrowed" the PerfectDisk algorithm, not the other way around.   Smiley
 

Ghost4me  Ghost 9, 10, 12, 14, 15.  Windows XP, Vista, Windows 7
 
IP Logged
 

k4kjf
Dude
*
Offline


2003 -Forever!

Posts: 21


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #56 - Mar 7th, 2008 at 8:59am
 
Bill Wood wrote on Mar 7th, 2008 at 8:15am:
I just discovered, you cannot create the recovery disk from the "Advanced" tab.  Go to one of the other tabs then the option to create a recovery disk should be under the Tasks menu.


Thanks.  I ended up uninstalling the trial version I had downloaded and activated a day later, and instead installed the version offered when I bought the product key.

Now the Create Recovery Disk IS present under the Tasks menu item.  

Not sure if I just missed it in my initial installation, or if it is really not available in the downloaded trial version.  

Anyway, it is OK now.

Thanks
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Wood
Gnarly
*
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 44
Villanova, PA


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #57 - Mar 7th, 2008 at 9:13am
 
Pleonasm wrote on Mar 4th, 2008 at 5:57pm:
Quote:
So why do you like ShadowProtect better than NG?

Please see this thread:  http://radified.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1190053581

I've done some research.  This thread (http://forums.storagecraft.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=353 - see the second post) is particularly interesting because it reviews the history of Norton Ghost, ShadowProtect, and Acronis.  NG (and the original Powerquest V2i product) licensed volume shadowing technology from Storagecraft (makers of ShadowProtect), they didn't develop their own.  The thread is out of date with respect to NG14 when it claims that "Symantec Ghost/LiveState do use an older version of StorageCraft's volume snapshot device driver which doesn't fully support VSS", as NG14 has licensed updated technology from Storagecraft.  I checked the symsnap.sys file in NG14, and its made by Storagecraft, version 7.0.1.24397, Copyright 2001-2008.

Pleonasm, can you check the version of *snap.sys in c:\windows\system32\drivers?  Volsnap.sys is the MS version, symsnap.sys is Symantec's licensed Storagecraft version.  I don't know what the filename is in the Storagecraft version.

 
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Wood
Gnarly
*
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 44
Villanova, PA


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #58 - Mar 7th, 2008 at 10:07am
 
Well, I'm a happy camper - just used the NG14 recovery disk to restore an NG10 disk image.  It was odd, the recovery disk didn't find the recovery point in the default "Date" view, I had to go into the "File" or the other view (can't remember the name - its the one where it views by complete recovery point set (.sv2i files) rather than .v2i, which the "File" view uses).

Anyway, everything's running smoothly, I'm typing this on the recovered machine.  Smiley
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: Norton Ghost 14
Reply #59 - Mar 7th, 2008 at 11:19am
 
Quote:
I'm running a trial version of ShadowProtect and the MB/sec figure it reports is not based on actual MB written to disk (ie the compressed backup size) - its based on the number of MB that are backed up.

Bill, you are correct – please see this thread.

Also, what did you discover when running a speed comparison of Norton Ghost 14 versus ShadowProtect Desktop 3.1?
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print