Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 20, 2019, 07:31:52 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
News:

+  DIY DataRecovery.nl Support forum
|-+  Support
| |-+  DiskPatch (Moderators: Tom, Joep)
| | |-+  Is there an optimum system to run diskpatch on?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Is there an optimum system to run diskpatch on?  (Read 3867 times)
tip32a
member

Posts: 38


« on: August 05, 2008, 05:40:03 AM »

Diskpatch routinely starts off with a 333 minute time and based on the progress goes up from there.  Is there a way to run diskpatch faster?

Assuming the source and destination drives are perfectly good.  ( I know!  I don't need disk patch for perfectly good drives) Cloning 2 80 gig drives on other applications (not data recovery apps) take 40 minutes.  Why is there such a descrepency in the clone times?

Is there a faster "data recovery" application?
Logged
Tom
Developer and Support Tech
Administrator
member
*****
Posts: 1476


WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 05, 2008, 09:17:07 AM »

Quote
Diskpatch routinely starts off with a 333 minute time and based on the progress goes up from there.  Is there a way to run diskpatch faster?
Probably not. Slow cloning could be caused by read problems, which is what DP is meant to handle but at the expense of speed.
Quote
Assuming the source and destination drives are perfectly good.  ( I know!  I don't need disk patch for perfectly good drives) Cloning 2 80 gig drives on other applications (not data recovery apps) take 40 minutes.  Why is there such a descrepency in the clone times?
DP usese a very different approach. The result is that the clone is relatively slow but the result is much more reliable, which we thought to be the priority.

I'm sure there are faster apps out there but they usually have a different approach. DP goes for "getting as much as possible from the disk" while most other cloning apps (with the exception of some very expensive dedicated data recovery tools) go for speed. Also, it's a naming thing: tools like Ghost or driveimage aren't cloning tools (they don't handle read errors all that well) so other "real" cloning tools are also likely to be slow.
Logged

Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!