• All Community
    • All Community
    • Forums
    • Ideas
    • Blogs
Advanced

Not what you are looking for? Ask the experts!

Kudos0

“Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

If I run my “Recovery Point Browser” Verify function multiple times on the same Point, the results are inconsistent; sometimes they pass and sometimes they fail.

Only happens on one of my drives; I suspect it's happening because the drive is "Dirty".  Unfortunately I only discovered this after the drive being backed up (my system drive) died.  I moved the Dirty backup destination drive to another computer and found CHKDSK wants to run on it, but I've disabled that since I can't risk CHKDSK filesystem changes interferring with my ability to restore to my newly arrived RMA hard drive.  (The Dirty drive passed drive diagnostics perfectly.)

And I expect I'll be able to restore from the Dirty drive, since I've been doing so successfully from time to time.  Then I'll start backing up to a different drive, and then I'll reformat the Dirty drive.

The reason I started trying to Verify points in the first place, was to see if it would give me any insight into whether the drive that died, had issues before it's demise, and if so when.  I've got recovery points that cover several years.

I don't intend to do a fresh install, because I intend to move from XP to Win8 when it comes out in a few months.

I apologize that this all doesn't exactly ask a specific question; I guess I thought someone might surprise me by reassuring me that the Browser's Verify either isn't reliable, or can somehow help say when the drive being backed up started to fail.

I'm inclined at this point to just go back a few months, thinking that would provide plenty of time before the drive started to fail.

Sorry for the long post!

Replies

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

Hi,

About the only thing I couldn't find in your message was the product and version youare running and need reassuring on.

Keep us posted

Dick Win 10x64 current current NSBU
Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

Oops, sorry, I'm writing about Ghost 15.

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

Oh no!  I just tried to restore a couple images, and they all give me "Error ED800012: The internat structure of the recovery point file (CRC Validation) is invalid, damaged or unsupported"

Is there anything I can do? 

Other than that as I mentioned above, if I connect the (Dirth) backup destination drive to another PC, in the Recovery Point Browser I can open, mount, and (hopefully) retrieve the data within. 

Kudos1 Stats

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

Are you doing the restore and verifications on different systems?

If an image verifies "sometimes" but not all the time I would suspect a hardware problem (RAM).

Dave

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent


DaveH wrote:

Are you doing the restore and verifications on different systems?

If an image verifies "sometimes" but not all the time I would suspect a hardware problem (RAM).

Dave


Yes; the Recovery Point Browser verifies are on a working PC; I think I Memtest86+ and Windows Memory Diagnostic, error-free, on it only a few weeks ago.. 

The restore failure is on a PC without a system drive; while waiting for the system drive to arrive over the last week, it's passed an exhaustive array of diagnostics and stress-testing including the above RAM testing, all hard drives, the GPU and CPU.

Here's the best I can come up with:

First I'll make a second (I already made one) TeraCopy of the 1TB of backup images on the Dirty drive.  Then I'll try to mount an image and get the data all off it.  Then I'll run CHKDSK on the Dirty drive at system reboot of the working machine; my prayer is that after this, the images will restore from the now-Dirty drive.  Plan B is a fresh install, hopefully withithout losing data thanks to the mount I'll be attempting.

Accepted Solution
Kudos3 Stats

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

A file is either good or bad, there is no in between and the image file does not get changed in any way during the verify.

Any inconsistant results have to be hardware related.

The image explorer also has a "copy" function.  You might want to try that as well to copy the verified image onto another NTFS drive without splitting the image into smaller pieces and using the standard compression.

If the copy also verifies on one system and not the other that may help you find what the problem really is.

If the hard drive used to be internal and is now being read over USB, that could also cause problems on some systems.

By the way, a hard drive in a dirty state does not necessarily mean the drive is going bad unless it has bad sectors on it.

Usually it is just file system or NTFS attribute problems and thats why it can pass a hard drive test when windows considers it dirty.

Best of luck,

Dave

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

Thank you very much for your excellent reply, Dave!

On a long-gone system which had repeated RAM stick failures, I learned to regard SRD Verify failures as the first sign of another stick dying.  But one time that wasn't the case; the recovery environment (SRD) wouldn't verify/restore, but in Windows the Recovery Point Browser verified fine; the people on Ghost phone support told me Point Browser verify was not to be trusted.  (Then again, I'm overjoyed that THIS forum now exists, because I almost always felt that I was teaching those phone support people, instead of it going the other way.)

I failed to note above that the Recovery Point Browser verifies pass only occasionally, maybe only 1 of 10 tries.  I'm not convinced I have any good images.  But thank you, I very much appreciate learning that the Recovery Point Browser has a Copy function, I will try what you suggest.

But first I think I'll repeat the RAM testing I did a couple weeks ago on the working machine, just to make sure it's still AOK.  (Overnight RAM testing on the system without a boot drive again passed errorlessly.)

I agree, I'm convinced that the Dirty drive has no functionality issues (it passes excellent diagnostics), but only filesystem errors.  While in my experience resolving filesystem errors with CHKDSK can totally hose the data on a drive (hence my plan to make a second backup first), this time I hope it saves my bacon.

Because I'm beyond alarmed at the possibility that after a lifetime of dedicated backing up, lightning has struck me in the form of a boot drive dying, and while awaiting RMA on it, it's backup drive's filesystem becomes corrupted such that the data is irretrievable. 

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

p.s.

coyote2 wrote:

I'll repeat the RAM testing I did a couple weeks ago on the working machine, just to make sure it's still AOK.  


 Done; RAM and CPU testing on both machines is still error-free.

Kudos1 Stats

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

I once had an image that would not verify or restore. I ended up mounting it as a drive letter and running chkdsk on it. It fixed the problem and I used either ImageX (from Microsoft) or Symantec Ghost to capture a new image (I cannot remember which). Unfortunately, you cannot use Norton Ghost to image a v2i file mounted as a drive letter. That would be handy for situations like this.

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent


redk9258 wrote:

I once had an image that would not verify or restore. I ended up mounting it as a drive letter and running chkdsk on it. It fixed the problem and I used either ImageX (from Microsoft) or Symantec Ghost to capture a new image (I cannot remember which). Unfortunately, you cannot use Norton Ghost to image a v2i file mounted as a drive letter. That would be handy for situations like this.


Fascinating, thank you!  Maybe I will need to get my hands on an alternate product to do as you did once I've mounted a v2i file.

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent


redk9258 wrote:

I once had an image that would not verify or restore. I ended up mounting it as a drive letter and running chkdsk on it. It fixed the problem and I used either ImageX (from Microsoft) or Symantec Ghost to capture a new image (I cannot remember which). Unfortunately, you cannot use Norton Ghost to image a v2i file mounted as a drive letter. That would be handy for situations like this.


How can I create an image from a v2i file mounted as a drive letter, please? 

I've looked into/googled doing it with Symantec Ghost and with ImageX, but so far what I've learned (I got a reply on the Symantec Ghost forum) isn't enouraging.
Kudos1 Stats

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

Perhaps they misunderstood what you were trying to do or they are not familiar with the consumer version of Ghost.

Red is correct, he wouldn't say he has done it unless he has done it.

I can mount an image as a drive letter and then reimage that mounted drive with both symantec ghost32 and imagex.

I didn't go through the process the entire way but both products could recognize the mounted drive and start with the image capture.

Personally, if you say the image file verifies approx 1 out of 10 times, I would attempt to restore the image in the normal way 10 times.  Statistically, I would imagine you may be successful after 5 attempts.  (Regardless of your RAM test I still say it has to be a hardware problem).

Another option perhaps is to use Ghost to convert the image into a .vhd

I'm pretty sure you get an option in the conversion to not run the mini-setup (sysprep) and Ghost is able to restore a partition from a vhd file if I remember correctly.  At least that way you would be using the same product for the entire process but you would need a lot of room to make the vhd because it would end up the full size of the partition that was imaged.

Where are you at this point, do you have the new drive and your ready to restore it?

Dave

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent


DaveH wrote:

Perhaps they misunderstood what you were trying to do or they are not familiar with the consumer version of Ghost.

Red is correct, he wouldn't say he has done it unless he has done it.

I can mount an image as a drive letter and then reimage that mounted drive with both symantec ghost32 and imagex.

I didn't go through the process the entire way but both products could recognize the mounted drive and start with the image capture.

Personally, if you say the image file verifies approx 1 out of 10 times, I would attempt to restore the image in the normal way 10 times.  Statistically, I would imagine you may be successful after 5 attempts.  (Regardless of your RAM test I still say it has to be a hardware problem).

Another option perhaps is to use Ghost to convert the image into a .vhd

I'm pretty sure you get an option in the conversion to not run the mini-setup (sysprep) and Ghost is able to restore a partition from a vhd file if I remember correctly.  At least that way you would be using the same product for the entire process but you would need a lot of room to make the vhd because it would end up the full size of the partition that was imaged.

Where are you at this point, do you have the new drive and your ready to restore it?

Dave


This is very reassuring, thank you very much DaveH.  I trust Red but since he couldn't recall the specific product, I didn't know to distrust my little investigation.

I have the new drive, and have tried to restore to it (but can't because presently the image fails Verify by the boot SRD disc.

One catch is that the only images that I've so far seen Verify are incrementals, whose previous incrementals and base haven't verified.

I've also downloaded a trial version of "Symantec Ghost Solution Suite 2.5.1".

I'll next try your  advice to run the restore a many many many times and see what happens. 

I'll also try to use Norton Ghost 15 to create a .vhd file.  However, I'm not sure how that approach would give the the opportunity to run CHKDSK on a mounted drive, which is the  attractive avenue to my salvation.

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

I forgot you said your using XP.  You would need windows 7 to easily mount a vhd file, with XP it would be a drawn out process using VirtualPC.

When you mount the image as a drive and run chkdsk on it, does it find and fix any problems?

Have you tried using image explorer to copy an image into another location to see if that image will verify each time?

Dave

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

I was able to use both Symantec Ghost and ImageX to capture an image from an image mounted as a drive letter.  Dave may be on to something using Ghostt 15 to convert the image toi a vhd file. You can restore a vhd file to a physical drive using the Ghost 15 SRD. Make sure you uncheck the option to run Mini Windows Setup or whatever it is called.

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent


redk9258 wrote:

I was able to use both Symantec Ghost and ImageX to capture an image from an image mounted as a drive letter.  Dave may be on to something using Ghostt 15 to convert the image toi a vhd file. You can restore a vhd file to a physical drive using the Ghost 15 SRD. Make sure you uncheck the option to run Mini Windows Setup or whatever it is called.


I've tried some things.

First I made more attempts to restore from the Dirty drive, but that failed all 120 times I tried.

Then I created a Ghost backup image of the Dirty drive, then I ran CHKDSK on it. The only notable lines reported were:

Windows will now check the disk. 
Cleaning up minor inconsistencies on the drive.
Cleaning up 1058 unused index entries from index $SII of file 0x9.
Cleaning up 1058 unused index entries from index $SDH of file 0x9.
Cleaning up 1058 unused security descriptors.

Then I tried a hundred more times to restore from the now-clean drive, and again failed every time.

I then moved the now-clean drive (on which if anyone thinks I should, I can undo the above CHKDSK by restoring it's Ghost backup) to my working machine.

I encountered a slight improvement: Now the most-recent image Verifies every time in the Recovery Point Browser. However, the Recovery Point Browser will not Copy the image (that fails every time with the CRC Validation error). As I noted previously I do not trust the Recovery Point Browser Verifies, because I have experience with the SRD's Verifies being more correct.

I attempted to create a .vhd file from the most-recent image, but the One Time Virtual Conversion Wizard only accepts as Source, images that Ghost knows the location of (i.e. I can't browse for the image on the now-clean drive which I switched to the working machine).

Finally I mounted the most-recent image and attempted to simply copy the data off. But doing so very frequently fails with "Cannot copy ______. Cannot read from the source file or disk.". Some files copy, then quickly it hits one that generates this error. I guess I can pick and attempt files one at a time if it comes to that (I recall doing that once with a corrupt image years ago, it took all day).

I tried to (filesystem) CHKDSK the mounted drive, but get an error message that "the disk check utility needs exclusive access to some Windows files on the disk...(that) can be accessed only by restarting Windows" (I wonder if it's that it is a mounted image of a system drive, even though for a different machine). But of course if I restart then the mounted drive will no longer exist.

Tomorrow I plan to find a trial download of Symantec Ghost (I already downloaded a trial version of Symantec Ghost Solution Suite 2.5, is that the same thing or as good?), then try to image the mounted drive (though towards what end I don't know, since it seems I can't CHKDSK the mounted drive.

In any case, while I'm getting discouraged, I deeply appreciate the help you wizards have given me.  You've infinitely more skilled and helpful than the Ghost phone support people; Norton should be paying YOU guys!

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

When you convert to a vhd file when your on the screen to select the source image, change the top box to view by filename.

You then get a browse button and should be able to selct any Ghost image you have.

Dave

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent


DaveH wrote:
If the hard drive used to be internal and is now being read over USB, that could also cause problems on some systems.

Yay, resolution!  You both earned it, but DaveH gets the "Solution" credit on this one.  The sentence above kept coming to my mind, and it led to a successful restore!

Not because any of my HDDs are/were over USB, but there was a change in SATA connection.

Not for the system drive; both the one that died and it's replacement are on a SATA connection.  And the (formerly Dirty) backup drive was always on a SIIG PCI card, but it changed from originally being on a SATA card, to being on an eSATA card and in an external enclosure (to make it easy to access the Dirty drive with either of my computers).

Once I returned the backup drive to the SATA card, the restore went perfectly.

Whew!  Now I'm running a CHKDSK on a restore of the most-recent image.  If there are filesystem issues, I'll try reverting back farther in case the filesystem issues demonstrate the physical drive had errors in advance of the drive's death.

Now that that nightmare is over, I'd like to underline that I initially did feel that the first thing to suspect would be hardware.  I only looked elsewhere when I thought I ruled out hardware.

(Years ago when as I mentioned earlier, I had a system that kept killing sticks of RAM, the first sign was usually an image failing to Verify.  Incidentally that makes me suspect that Ghost makes particularly robust use of RAM.)

But as I mentioned, I did thorough diagnostic testing on the two systems (HDDs, RAM, CPU).  For example, I recalled that sometimes the bad RAM sticks would pass Memtest86+.  And Windows Memory Diagnostic, until I ran the "ERAND" test many times.  Bad sticks would take as much as 24 hours running the "ERAND" test continuously to present an error in that test; which seemed reasonable when I read that (being "random") that test was different every time.  But I ran the Windows Memory Diagnostic's "ERAND" test on my problem computer for 72 hours without any errors.  

A few more things, not that I really need answers to them anymore:

  1. Was there a way around WinXP's insistence that I reboot before I CHKDSK a drive mounted by the "Recovery Point Browser" (which would of course be impossible).
  2. Using Norton Ghost 15 to create a VHD file from an image seemed to be working for a  couple hours, until I got numerous errors starting with these two, the first after 2.5 hours:

Then this 5 minutes later:

Kudos0

Re: “Recovery Point Browser” Verify inconsistent

Funny you mention that problem.

On this very system I'm using right now I had a similar issue and it took me forever to figure out what the problem was.

I have a PCI highpoint SATA card that I was using to add more ports.  I had changed a drive from the highpoint card to a motherboard connection and a couple weeks later started noticing some problems and corrupted files.

Since the problem didn't happen right away it took me quite a while before I associated the move with the problems.

I finally figured out that all the files before a certain point on the drive was fine but files after 128GB or so were getting corrupted.

Then I knew right away it was a geometry issue.

I ended up having to move everything off that drive and with it connected to the motherboards SATA port I recreated the partition and did a full format.  I'm pretty sure that doing a full format instead of a quick format helped.

Now I can fill up the drive and move it back and forth between the MB and highpoint card without any problems.

I guess the highpoint card had problems with large drive support, or at least creating and formatting a large partition.

Glad you figured it out, it took me much longer then it took you.

Dave

This thread is closed from further comment. Please visit the forum to start a new thread.