Seeking an Image Utility allowing backup files to be split into chunks

[Zoandar]

I was hoping to split up the System Images I am making on my Win7 Home Premium PC into 25GB chunks of files so I can burn them to Bluray discs. But I see the file layout inside a System Image folder puts most of the data in a single file, for me far more than 50GB in size. So I am looking for either a way to break it into pieces, burn it to discs, and still be able to reassemble it again (using a boot disc if necessary) or looking for a different imaging utility which has this file splitting ability built in. Can anyone suggest a solution?

 

[rap33042]

GSplit will split files and join them back again; any size you want.

Another option would be to use third-party backup software, either free or commercial; they all allow setting output file sizes.

GSplit can be found here: GSplit - File Splitter - Split Any File - Split Text and Log Files

I use Acronis: Backup software for data backup and disaster recovery in Windows and Linux - Acronis

Then there's Macrium Reflect, EASUS Todo, and a wealth of other free backup solutions.

 

[Zoandar]

Thanks for the suggestions! One of the things that crossed my mind is the added risk of having to transfer huge files such as these to the PC I use for burning discs, which is where I had mounted my new Bluray drive. That PC runs WinXP and Nero 8. So I have decided to put the Bluray drive into the Win7 PC, and am currently running a System Image directly to the Bluray drive discs. The data being imaged is 79GB, so with a little luck the compression System Image uses will make the total fit on three 25GB bluray discs. I can live with that. Unfortunately it is much slower to make the backup having to write it to disc on the fly, but I guess we can't have 'everything' now can we? The first disc took about 45 minutes to write and verify before it asked for the next disc.

I'll take a look at G-split. As far as Acronis goes, I know many people like it but I do not. I tried it last year and had nothing but problems. It gave all appearances of making a correct image backup to discs, but when the chips were down and I needed to use the backup it had created to fix a corrupt system, it failed to restore. A friend of mine was also trying it and had similar failure to restore his system as well. So I decided not to buy it.

Back in the day, I used Drive Image for several versions over many years, and swore by it. But when a certain yellow company whom I won't mention bought it up and killed it off to promote their own spectre in its place, that was the end of that.

Drive Image used to give me some problems with XP now and then, but in the earlier Windows versions it saved my skin many times over and turned what had been countless precious weekend hours spent reinstalling windows 95 and 98 into a simple 15 minute restore session. I miss the days when a C: drive image fit on a single CD.

Thanks!

 

[rap33042]

Drive Image used to give me some problems with XP now and then, but in the earlier Windows versions it saved my skin many times over and turned what had been countless precious weekend hours spent reinstalling windows 95 and 98 into a simple 15 minute restore session. I miss the days when a C: drive image fit on a single CD.

Thanks!

That last bit is why I have so many partitions set up. I have Windows 7 on the C: drive - and that's it.

I don't install programs to that drive, nor do I allow programs to send their data to that drive. I don't put games, music, pictures, or anything else there. So it all fits neatly on 1-2 DVD/RW and takes about 20 minutes to backup (slow 2x DVDs).
FYI: C: = 40GB; I'm using ~20GB; my images are roughly 4-5GB

The beauty of this is that if my system drive gets messed up due to a bad driver, or update, or any other reason, I don't have to recover all the extraneous data, too (ie, programs, music, etc). It takes less than 10 minutes and I'm good to go.

PS: I used to use Drive Image as well and I miss it, too.

 

[Zoandar]

You mean like this? (attached)

I used to follow the same partitioning scheme myself, but I dropped my guard when the editors at Maximum PC Magazine (who also used to think this way) started promoting installing "everything" on the C drive, claiming with today's PCs the performance was better that way. But recently they have swung back to recommending the same isolation as before. I only read that after I had allowed the Win7 C drive to get very plump, as you can see. When I next rebuild the PC I will keep all but necessary files off C again.

I ran a Win7 System Image backup to Bluray discs today just to see how it would work. It took 2 25GB discs to hold the compressed 79GB of backup. Each disc was written and then verified in about 45 minutes time, so the whole process took less than 2 hours. If I consider how long it would take to make the actual System Image to a HD, then add how long it would take to try to split the files down and squeeze them onto Bluray discs, I think that 2 hours is quite reasonable for ending up with the files on disc.

Putting the C drive back on a diet would seriously shorten the process and it would easily fit on one disc per backup. Heck, I know for a fact there are over 2 GB of "temp" files under my user account on the C drive without even looking any further. I meant to delete them but did not remember to do so before the backup. As to why MS would find it necessary to amass 2GB of temporary files I have no clue. I never use the "My xxx" folders in Windows to store things, so the only stuff getting put in user file subfolders is stuff Windows 7 insists on putting there. But I initially had some big apps on C, like Flight Simulator X, until I decided to move them to another drive. I would not be surprised if much of what is in my user file subfolders has to do with leftovers from removing those apps and relocating them. I like to rebuild from scratch at least yearly, and prefer every 6 months, so I won't worry about it. When I format and rebuild I'll try to avoid letting the drive get so crowded next time.

 

[rap33042]

Ya! LOL! That's what I do. I have ~15 'drives' set up right now. And I like it!

 

[Zoandar]

I began doing this to make using Drive Image easier years ago, and to keep my data separated from the OS. As optical media grew larger, I made each partition 640, 800MB, then 4GB when DVDs came out. I suppose now I could go 25 or 50GB now that I have Bluray. I like the idea of an entire "drive" contents fitting on a single disc without requiring any sort of compression or proprietary backup program. I simply burn the whole thing to a disc and move on. It also gets me many copies of the data that way over time, so if I do lose a disc (some do go bad sometimes) I always have all the other ones before and after it to prevent total data loss. I use CD Library storage devices, ( Dacal and Ziotek) so each disc is cataloged when it gets entered into the system, making it fairly easy to find what I am looking for later.

I did briefly go with the "all things on C" operations when it became recommended, as I mentioned before, but I really don't like that. For one thing, if your physical drive fails, and we know they all do eventually, you lose everything. And trying to make backups to disc is exponentially harder that way. Glad to know I am not the only one who sees the logic in our method.