Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Unusual backup size

21 Dec 2011   #21
JimLewandowski

 
 

Missing User profile in registry

Vista Backup Failing : 0x80070002 Error Code

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/w...6-c5ef5c775f77



USB issue

http://social.technet.microsoft.com/...-ab1d8faddc92/


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
21 Dec 2011   #22
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
Ok....

So... I was able to change the backup size down to normal... (50GB) by empty everything in my E drive but now im having a different problem...

I can no longer backup my system at all....

keep getting the following error

[IMG] Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]

sigh... one problem after another >.< maybe i should just format my windows...

any advises?

thanks!
In the process of clearing the other partitions you probably deleted some files that the system is looking for now.

No need to reinstall. Just get off that defunct Win7 imaging and use a sensible imaging program.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
21 Dec 2011   #23
lehnerus2000

W7 Ultimate SP1, LM18 MATE, W10IP VM, W10 Home, #All 64 bit
 
 
Back in the "good old days"

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by mjf View Post
I haven't looked extensively but it appears to me
1) No gain moving pagefile to another partition
2) Maybe a marginal gain on another disk
eg, Ref:
Is it a good idea to change my Microsoft Windows page file size?
3) Sufficient RAM (which is relatively cheap) should place less emphasis on the pagefile.

So in the OP's case I would have thought moving the pagefile to another disk create more problems than it is worth. I use Windows imaging extensively with complete success. The OP's configuration effectively removes this capability in a practical sense.
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by whs View Post
You are absolutely right. No point moving the pagefile. With e.g. 4GBs of RAM, reduce it to 1GB for the very rare hard page fault that some programs produce - even if there is sufficient availablee RAM. And since the page faults are rare, there is really no performance gain.
I read about moving the pagefile back when I was using XP (~6 years ago).
The theory was that you would get superior performance, because you wouldn't be trying to read/write to the pagefile and OS partition simultaneously.
It seemed like a reasonable explanation to me.

Since I first started using Windows 98 (~10 years ago) it has been my practice to move everything possible off of the OS partition.
My friends all complained that they had to reinstall Windows every 2 or 3 weeks.
They also claimed that it wasn't because of malware.

The only reason I could think of, was that the constant read/write operations, on the OS partition, were causing the failures.
Therefore I moved everything that I could, off of the OS partition.
I only had to reinstall Windows 98 when I got hit by malware or I got a new HDD (so not every 2 or 3 weeks).

With modern hardware (large amounts of cheap RAM) there probably is no appreciable benefit to moving the pagefile.

My Windows 2K8 textbook recommended:
pagefile = 1.5 x RAM (caveat: see the MS links below)
Here are some MS links:
How to determine the appropriate page file size for 64-bit versions of Windows
How to overcome the 4,095 MB paging file size limit in Windows

I also remember reading (a few years ago) constant complaints about Windows backup (thus I use Macrium).

In any case the solution to the original problem is still the same:
Installing some other program to create your backups.
And/Or
Moving the pagefile back to your OS partition (or its own small partition).
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

21 Dec 2011   #24
JimLewandowski

 
 

IIRC, pagefile writes outnumber reads 10:1. Windows puts stuff in it (very little) but seldom is it recalled (can't find the Russinovich discussion right now)

So, the question I wish people would have been asking for 10 years is: how much paging file activity does your system incur? And, if you have caching policy set to allow writes to be completed as soon as the data is in the controller cache vs. waiting for it to be physically destaged to disk, then it matters even less where you put it.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
21 Dec 2011   #25
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

Yeah, sometimes history teaches us a lesson - but in this case it teaches us the wrong lesson. If you were looking for performance, moving the pagefile off the SSD would be counterproductive. But with today's systems that usually have a lot of RAM, the pagefile is used so rarely that it really is a non issue.

In addition to being rarely used, it is also used in very small doses. So a 1GB size suffices.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
21 Dec 2011   #26
JimLewandowski

 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by whs View Post
Yeah, sometimes history teaches us a lesson - but in this case it teaches us the wrong lesson. If you were looking for performance, moving the pagefile off the SSD would be counterproductive. But with today's systems that usually have a lot of RAM, the pagefile is used so rarely that it really is a non issue.

In addition to being rarely used, it is also used in very small doses. So a 1GB size suffices.
Having been in the field since the mid 80's, I am amazed at how hard it is to kill bad technical information in this field. People just won't adapt to technical evolution.

I was thinking of putting my Windows Search index on my SATA drive once I install my SSD.

I was mentioning to someone at work, that basically with SSDs, future releases of Windows can gut virtually all the code that was put in to reduce physical disk access. All that code to sort boot files during I/O to reduce head movement. All that stuff.

Much the same way too many people think 64-bit will "run faster" when 99% of the time, it's simply virtual storage constraint relief (address space map). There might be some cases where you're butting up against the address space limit, but not often.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
21 Dec 2011   #27
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

Right Jim. Rumors run faster than fact. But who cares, let the morons live with their believes.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
21 Dec 2011   #28
mjf

Windows 7x64 Home Premium SP1
 
 

I think the ironic thing in all of this is that I don't think imaging programs including Windows include the page file. But because it's a system file Windows may want to include the partition it is on!
If you are going to deviate from a basic MS Windows configuration for some good reason a good third imaging program is probably the way I would go.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
21 Dec 2011   #29
JimLewandowski

 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by mjf View Post
I think the ironic thing in all of this is that I don't think imaging programs including Windows include the page file. But because it's a system file Windows may want to include the partition it is on!
If you are going to deviate from a basic MS Windows configuration for some good reason a good third imaging program is probably the way I would go.
Weird, isn't it? It probably has to do with the semi-same reason that on Disk Management, the PAGE FILE is one of the attributes listed next to a partition.

EDIT: Since System Image is in "VHD" (block-level) backup mode, WHOLE volumes/partitions copied is the only M.O. available.

I'm still happy using Windows System Image/Backup, though.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
22 Dec 2011   #30
lehnerus2000

W7 Ultimate SP1, LM18 MATE, W10IP VM, W10 Home, #All 64 bit
 
 
Reducing writes

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by whs View Post
If you were looking for performance, moving the pagefile off the SSD would be counterproductive.
Agreed.
I've never heard anyone say that moving your pagefile from your SSD to a HDD increases performance.
It's always been recommended as a way of reducing write operations performed on the SSD.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Unusual backup size




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
"Windows Backup size" not reflecting actual backup file size
I'm having a problem with a system image (C: drive and System Reserved drive, that I made with a scheduled Windows Backup) and its size. I have a D: drive where I store it. First of all, I noticed this in D: drive properties: http://i.imgur.com/1ZAmdW2.jpg http://i.imgur.com/P73edVm.jpg ...
Backup and Restore
Unusual physical size of PSU - recommendations please
Greetings. I came across this forum whilst searching for hints on how to adjust my Win7 Lappy to how I want it: e.g. change the appearance of the Start Button / fix AutoRun issues of an external USB Drive / etc. Massive thanks to all of the unsung heroes, for the help / downloads: - now my...
Hardware & Devices
Windows backup size
My friend has just got a 500gb USB3 drive for backups and I showed him how to partition it into 3 parts. His laptop has C and E partitions which total about 85gb. When he selected one of the partitions on the backup drive and ran the Windows backup the finished backup was 105gb. How can the backup...
Backup and Restore
Windows Backup is double the size
Windows Backup worked fine for me for 1.5 years. Now something strange is happening. I have it set to do a weekly backup of data files. I noticed a week or so ago that the backup file size was 180Gb instead of 90GB. Looking at the backup it said something like 7/22/2012 to 8/12/2012. Prior to...
Backup and Restore
Backup size increasing
Hello, I am using windows backup for my users libraries, and a system image. I have selected to keep only the latest backup. Every time the machine backs up the file/s size on my backup drive increases. After a couple of weeks the drive is full and I have to start all over again. Why...
Backup and Restore
size of backup disk
For extra backup security I was going to buy another 320 GB external drive for storing system images. Another thread stated that for system images the backup drive must be a higher capacity than the drive being backed up. That is you couldn't backup a 1 TB drive with say 100 GB used to the 320GB...
Backup and Restore


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:41.

Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App