problems after running chkdsk - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: problems after running chkdsk

  1. #11
    Keeping The Balance CybertecOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    659
    Quote Originally Posted by Und3ertak3r
    IF it is not a hardware failure.. AND it was a simple problem due to Filesystem Database error as the result of a bad shutdown.. AND CHKDSK was let loose.. yes system files WILL be damaged..
    AND FAT32 is many times more likely to suffer damage.. and more likely to have CHKDSK remove vital system files...
    Ahh ic I never really considered that 'coping ability' so to speak of the file system. Obviously NTFS is more preferable for all the reasons of storage, accessibility and security - However, in a critical event, i assumed it was just more that could go wrong.

    Intrigued

    CTO
    "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius --- and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
    - Albert Einstein

  2. #12
    The Doctor Und3ertak3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    2,744
    Quote Originally Posted by morganlefay View Post
    I have been working with computers for several years and have never seen chkdsk fluck up a system...or drive unless it was ready to fail...usually there are other issues present.

    I have seen corrupted installs where chkdsk couldnt fix it...and I have seen drives with bad sectors where chkdsk moved the files and marked the area not for use.....and the system has hummed away for years after.

    as always as backup of any system should be performed before running any disc or recovery utilities.

    What was the reason for running chkdsk in the first place??

    MLF
    not to be argumentative.. but just because someone has never seen something is not reason to think it doesn't exist..

    I do find the tone of your opening comment more on the confronting side.. but your not one to try to wind someone up .. are you..
    "Consumer technology now exceeds the average persons ability to comprehend how to use it..give up hope of them being able to understand how it works." - Me http://www.cybercrypt.co.nr

  3. #13
    The Doctor Und3ertak3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    2,744
    Quote Originally Posted by CybertecOne View Post
    Ahh ic I never really considered that 'coping ability' so to speak of the file system. Obviously NTFS is more preferable for all the reasons of storage, accessibility and security - However, in a critical event, i assumed it was just more that could go wrong.

    Intrigued

    CTO
    Not the File system expert.. there are people who can give you the full goss on the pro's and con's of the various file systems..

    with MS some times even the OS does not have enough robustness/intelligence to survive some simple filesystem stuff-ups.. like recognising that the file error is in a system file and restoring a copy from cache.. instead of moving the whole thing off to a bin some where.. in the vain hope the user is able to work out wtf the file is and where it should come from and how to restore a valid working copy.. with a non functioning OS..
    just one dll is all it takes to kill XP.. but just hiding a few files in the System32 folder can make it mighty ill with out complete death...
    "Consumer technology now exceeds the average persons ability to comprehend how to use it..give up hope of them being able to understand how it works." - Me http://www.cybercrypt.co.nr

  4. #14
    Keeping The Balance CybertecOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    659
    not to be argumentative.. but just because someone has never seen something is not reason to think it doesn't exist..

    I do find the tone of your opening comment more on the confronting side.. but your not one to try to wind someone up .. are you..
    Its not worth it MLF.... walk away.

    ---

    IMO, the cause and effect of a file system error is universal across all file systems. What could cause a catastrophic issue on one particular FS, can do the same damage on any other FS.

    Therefore, I cannot agree that FAT32 file systems have any effect or contribution to ANY problem caused as described, or any problem i have encountered in my many years in IT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Und3ertak3r
    Most likely... When I have encountered that sort of issue .. the Drive was formatted under FAT32..
    I therefore pose that the above statement is entirely non-sensical/erroneous.

    The mere fact that most of the machines in which you have encountered problems have a FAT32 FS is entirely co-incidental, as in my experience the file system of a machine does not play into any equation unless considering data recovery or changes to the existing file system. I honestly cannot think of a time when i thought to myself during diagnosis, "oh, i better check what the FS was" ... "just in case that is what caused the problem"

    CTO
    Last edited by CybertecOne; October 20th, 2008 at 04:54 PM.
    "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius --- and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
    - Albert Einstein

  5. #15
    AOs Resident Troll
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,152
    I do find the tone of your opening comment more on the confronting side.. but your not one to try to wind someone up .. are you..
    who me???

    only people that are easily wound...

    MLF

    ]EDIT> excellent article on troubleshooting disk issues with MS oses
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../bb457122.aspx
    Last edited by morganlefay; October 20th, 2008 at 07:01 PM. Reason: add content
    How people treat you is their karma- how you react is yours-Wayne Dyer

  6. #16
    Dissident 4dm1n brokencrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Shawnee country
    Posts
    1,242
    Quote Originally Posted by nihil View Post
    Yes, running chkdsk on a drive that has physical problems will only make things worse.
    Not necessarily. I replaced two harddrives in as
    many days last week both of which generated errors
    when Ghost was run. Until I used "chkdsk /r" (both
    times the file system got repaired), there was no
    way to ghost the things. So, obviously, chkdsk can
    make a HDD better, at least temporarily. But such
    a repair is not something you want to count on unless
    it's for a recovery.

    What IS interesting was both drives were SATA
    and chkdsk would not repair the system when run
    natively from the installed OS (both XP). When
    I booted off a PE disk and ran chkdsk, they were
    repaired. That's a first (for me). Something to
    bear in as you see more SATA drives.
    “Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.” — Will Rogers

  7. #17
    AOs Resident Troll
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,152
    chkdisk cannot run and repair on the drive while the OS is loaded ...and should ask you if you want to run on a restart so it can lock the drive\files as it tests the integrety of the file system and looks for corrupted files and damaged sectors on the drive.

    And depending on the size of the drive and number of files can take a very long time.

    If I suspect a drive failing...I usually slave it into another machine and backup the data...then use that machine to run chkdsk on the drive....in a sense using a boot disk.

    If a drive is failing you usually will have issues with writing to the disk, slow boot...maybe clicking noises and errors in the event log.

    Slaving the drive or using a boot disk to read and copy data puts less stress on the drive as there is minimal writing...

    Then when running utilities such as chkdsk may kill the drive ...if it is physically damaged beyond the point of repair. .... else it will mark the damaged area and not use it...move the files to another area and.......... voila....you are up and running again. Now if this was a mission critical machine...I would consider replacing the drive.

    But thats just me....and my ever so humble opinion on the matter

    MLF
    Last edited by morganlefay; October 21st, 2008 at 05:05 AM. Reason: grammer error... :P
    How people treat you is their karma- how you react is yours-Wayne Dyer

  8. #18
    Keeping The Balance CybertecOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    659
    Then when running utilities such as chkdsk may kill the drive ...if it is physically damaged beyond the point of repair. .... else it will mark the damaged area and not use it...move the files to another area and.......... voila....you are up and running again
    Replacing the drive is always the best way to go; new drive, new warranty, less wear and tear etc

    I just wanted to point out that if it is a logical problem with the sectors (or even physical damage) and chkdsk marks those sectors as bad and moves the data, you wont have any future problems from the same cause.

    However, if the physical damage is affecting moving parts (heads, bearings), expect the drive to continue to degrade even after chkdsk has done its work.


    CTO
    Last edited by CybertecOne; October 21st, 2008 at 06:35 AM.
    "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius --- and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
    - Albert Einstein

  9. #19
    AOs Resident Troll
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,152
    You are absolutely right CTO.....

    I just meant that the only time I have seen chkdsk fluck up a drive was one already damaged....and that I have used chkdsk to recover a few machines...that went on humming for a couple of years.

    I guess my point would be backup backup backup before doing anything

    MLF
    How people treat you is their karma- how you react is yours-Wayne Dyer

  10. #20
    Dissident 4dm1n brokencrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Shawnee country
    Posts
    1,242
    Quote Originally Posted by morganlefay View Post
    chkdisk cannot run and repair on the drive while the OS is loaded ...and should ask you if you want to run on a restart so it can lock the drive\files as it tests the integrety of the file system and looks for corrupted files and damaged sectors on the drive.
    I'm well aware of how chkdsk works. It's strange, I'd never seen anything like this until last week. Both machines would hang at a certain point after the mandatory reboot and chkdsk started. One machine we left running for hours on end and it just sat at 43% during stage 4 once it got to that point. Then booting to a PE disk, chkdsk would work right thru, albeit slowly, and fixed the file system. Like I said, something to bear in mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by morganlefay View Post
    If I suspect a drive failing...I usually slave it into another machine and backup the data...then use that machine to run chkdsk on the drive....in a sense using a boot disk.

    If a drive is failing you usually will have issues with writing to the disk, slow boot...maybe clicking noises and errors in the event log.

    Slaving the drive or using a boot disk to read and copy data puts less stress on the drive as there is minimal writing...

    Then when running utilities such as chkdsk may kill the drive ...if it is physically damaged beyond the point of repair. .... else it will mark the damaged area and not use it...move the files to another area and.......... voila....you are up and running again. Now if this was a mission critical machine...I would consider replacing the drive.
    I do mostly field work and some clients can be hesitant about sensitive data, especially acct'ing, being copied over to one of my laptops. So I use bootdisks and usb drives to do backups generally, then run chkdsk in an attempt to prepare the file system for ghosting. Reinstalling from scratch is less profitable from my standpoint and I get less whining if I manage to restore the computer to it's former state.
    “Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.” — Will Rogers

Similar Threads

  1. Windows XP won't start after running Anti Spyware tools
    By bagggi in forum Operating Systems
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: December 23rd, 2005, 02:02 PM
  2. The history of the Mac line of Operating systems
    By gore in forum Operating Systems
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 7th, 2004, 08:02 AM
  3. I am HACKED! Help Me Please!
    By Shakira in forum Newbie Security Questions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 16th, 2004, 10:07 AM
  4. Tcp/ip
    By gore in forum Newbie Security Questions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: December 29th, 2003, 08:01 AM
  5. The Worlds Longest Thread!
    By Noble Hamlet in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
    Replies: 1100
    Last Post: March 17th, 2002, 09:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •