Backup vs Recovery Speed

Disk backup and restore, partition imaging and cloning, and drive copy using R-Drive Image.
Forum rules
Discussion on the R-Drive Image software

Backup vs Recovery Speed

Post by Guest » Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:30 am

Hi, the software is working great and is very fast for taking images. But I have a question about the amount of time it takes to recover the images. Here's an example scenario from this past weekend:
  • We took a backup of a 465GB drive (entire drive, single partition, Windows, NTFS, about 90% full). The backup process took approximately 5 hours.
  • We went to restore disks/partitions and chose to Expand/Shrink partition to whole disk. The restore process took approximately 26 hours.
We've seen similar results with other restores. I should mention that, in each case, the network speed, backup location and media, and all other variables remained the same for the backup & restore. In all cases, we are just yanking a smaller drive and upgrading it to a larger one, then running the restore process.

Is there a particular reason that it takes so much longer to recover the data than it does to back it up? Would it be faster if we chose Copy all partitions onto original places and then manually ran diskpart (or equivalent)?

Thanks for your time & input.

Site Moderator
Posts: 3043
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:13 pm

Re: Backup vs Recovery Speed

Post by Alt » Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:32 am

I think copying all partitions and then running partition manager software would take more time than expanding partitions while restoring data to a new disk using R-Drive Image.
Actually, your system works overall quite slowly. We did almost the same test: Imaging a 600 GB disk (465 GB with data) then restoring to a 2TB disk through a 1 GB network. It took 1h48min to image and 1h36min to restore.

Post Reply