URGENT HELP !!!...FS2004/Radeon 9700 Probs......

NTFS is not the cure all your proclaiming it to be. Though I would never go back to FAT. He may also be having hard
drive problems, or cable problems, or power problems. Is he caching hard drive writes?

NTFS does keep a somewhat hidden transaction log that consumes more space on your hard drive than FAT.

So I agree use NTFS. Far superior to FAT. Check your Event Log periodically for drive errors.

--
....Carl Frisk
Anger is a brief madness.
- Horace, 20 B.C.
http://www.carlfrisk.com


"Greg Copeland" wrote in message news
On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:48:03 +0000, Derek wrote:


1. On boot up, his PC (he is using Windows XP), starts giving "file
.
.
.
How does he stop his PC attempting to go through the above lengthy process
each time on boot up ? Does he have to let it go through the complete
procedure at least once ? After that should he no longer get the warning
?


Yes. The drive is marked as "dirty" until it's able to complete this
diagnostic and correct step. It will be marked "clean" once it completes.
After which, assuming nothing else funky is going on here, it should boot
without requiring this step.

I should also point out that if he does have file system problems,
continued use of the filesystem while it damage can greatly extend the
damage to the filesystem. It's very possible to much, much worse off if
he continues to ignore this problem.

If the system is identifying cross-linked files, it's telling you that you
have some form of filesystem corruption. It's important that you let the
system fix what it can. It's also important to realize that some files
may be damaged beyond repair. The repair process only works to get the
filesystem repaired and properly layed out. Once the filesystem is in a
known good state, it's still possible to have files which remained
damaged. Worse, the process of repairing the filesystem can actually
damage some files. The details and extent of any possible damage and the
degree at which that damage can be repaired greatly depends on the nature
of the filesystem damage and the types of file activity that has been done
post-damage.

If possible, he REALLY needs to convert his filesystem to NTFS. NTFS is
much, much better than FAT. FAT is used by anyone that is begging to
suffer from filesystem corruption. FAT also suffers from very, very long
consistency checks. NTFS is a journaled filesystem, which means it always
attempts to keep the filesystem in good order without requiring a fsck to
be done on it. At worst, in bad situations, NTFS may still be checked but
the speed is mucho, mucho faster than the checks required for FAT. Best
of all, if the drive is very large and he converts to NTFS, he should gain
a fair amount of additional drive space back for actual file use. FAT is
horribly wasteful of allocated file space.

Hope this helps!

Cheers!


References:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...convertfat.asp

On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:24:09 +0000, Carl Frisk wrote:

Well, I don't believe I offered it as cure all. In fact, I said, "NTFS is
much, much better than FAT", which it is. Just the same, FAT is stone
age technology which was been grafted with what, three of four major
technology improvements just to keep it running on modern hardware.
Accordingly, NTFS represents a modern filesystem which has many, many
advantages (journal, better disk space management, security, better
caching, faster searches, faster recovery, fragmentation & corruption
resistance, etc, etc) and little to no disadvantges (more memory used and
requires that you make recovery disks). Even with hard drive writes, NTFS
is a better solution. The reason being, the journal will allow the FS to
return to a known good state. That's the whole point. Of course, that's
not saying you won't or can't lose data and/or files!

Which does remind me! If you convert your boot drive to NTFS, MAKE SURE
YOU CREATE YOUR RECOVERY DISKS!!!!!

NTFS is not the cure all your proclaiming it to be. Though I would never go back to FAT. He may also be having hard
drive problems, or cable problems, or power problems. Is he caching hard drive writes?

NTFS does keep a somewhat hidden transaction log that consumes more space on your hard drive than FAT.

So I agree use NTFS. Far superior to FAT. Check your Event Log periodically for drive errors.

True Greg, I was just adding emphasis to the 'it's not a cure all' while confirming that I agree it is the only choice I
would make for a Win file system. The one time I ever saw a problem with NTFS was in transferring large files around
800GB to another drive on another machine. It turned out to be the PERC2 controller! As soon as the NTFS developer
talked to the Dell engineer and sent the Debug info Dell sent a prototype card next day and we were back up and running.
The lock up froze both machines until you rebooted one or the other. That was fixed around a year ago. We had both
engineers onsite on Friday and it was fixed by Monday on both NTFS and the PERC2.

--
....Carl Frisk
Anger is a brief madness.
- Horace, 20 B.C.
http://www.carlfrisk.com


"Greg Copeland" wrote in message news
On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:24:09 +0000, Carl Frisk wrote:

Well, I don't believe I offered it as cure all. In fact, I said, "NTFS is
much, much better than FAT", which it is. Just the same, FAT is stone
age technology which was been grafted with what, three of four major
technology improvements just to keep it running on modern hardware.
Accordingly, NTFS represents a modern filesystem which has many, many
advantages (journal, better disk space management, security, better
caching, faster searches, faster recovery, fragmentation & corruption
resistance, etc, etc) and little to no disadvantges (more memory used and
requires that you make recovery disks). Even with hard drive writes, NTFS
is a better solution. The reason being, the journal will allow the FS to
return to a known good state. That's the whole point. Of course, that's
not saying you won't or can't lose data and/or files!

Which does remind me! If you convert your boot drive to NTFS, MAKE SURE
YOU CREATE YOUR RECOVERY DISKS!!!!!

NTFS is not the cure all your proclaiming it to be. Though I would never go back to FAT. He may also be having hard
drive problems, or cable problems, or power problems. Is he caching hard drive writes?

NTFS does keep a somewhat hidden transaction log that consumes more space on your hard drive than FAT.

So I agree use NTFS. Far superior to FAT. Check your Event Log periodically for drive errors.

Hi Greg,

Many thanks for your detailed help.

My friend has done as you say, and let the file checker do its stuff which
it did succesfully, and he can now boot up normally.

He has also solved some of his probs with FS2004 but has a gut feeling it
still wasnt running as it should.

So he has now taken his PC back to the shop, and they are formatting the
hard drive they only just installed the other day. Amongst other things,
even when he had his OLD hard drive we think there was something wrong in
his registry, that was blocking certain volumes of the "Just Flight VFR
Scenery" package series for FS2002/4 being installed.

His PC was due back from the shop today, but he hasnt phoned me so I presume
there has been a delay.

Thanks for all your help my friend

Derek
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:48:03 +0000, Derek wrote:


1. On boot up, his PC (he is using Windows XP), starts giving "file
.
.
.
How does he stop his PC attempting to go through the above lengthy
process
each time on boot up ? Does he have to let it go through the complete
procedure at least once ? After that should he no longer get the warning
?


Yes. The drive is marked as "dirty" until it's able to complete this
diagnostic and correct step. It will be marked "clean" once it completes.
After which, assuming nothing else funky is going on here, it should boot
without requiring this step.

I should also point out that if he does have file system problems,
continued use of the filesystem while it damage can greatly extend the
damage to the filesystem. It's very possible to much, much worse off if
he continues to ignore this problem.

If the system is identifying cross-linked files, it's telling you that you
have some form of filesystem corruption. It's important that you let the
system fix what it can. It's also important to realize that some files
may be damaged beyond repair. The repair process only works to get the
filesystem repaired and properly layed out. Once the filesystem is in a
known good state, it's still possible to have files which remained
damaged. Worse, the process of repairing the filesystem can actually
damage some files. The details and extent of any possible damage and the
degree at which that damage can be repaired greatly depends on the nature
of the filesystem damage and the types of file activity that has been done
post-damage.

If possible, he REALLY needs to convert his filesystem to NTFS. NTFS is
much, much better than FAT. FAT is used by anyone that is begging to
suffer from filesystem corruption. FAT also suffers from very, very long
consistency checks. NTFS is a journaled filesystem, which means it always
attempts to keep the filesystem in good order without requiring a fsck to
be done on it. At worst, in bad situations, NTFS may still be checked but
the speed is mucho, mucho faster than the checks required for FAT. Best
of all, if the drive is very large and he converts to NTFS, he should gain
a fair amount of additional drive space back for actual file use. FAT is
horribly wasteful of allocated file space.

Hope this helps!

Cheers!


References:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...convertfat.asp

Ah, the registry. The registry is only of Microsoft's biggests curses
placed on their own platform. The registry only, ever grows in size and
can not be shrunk once it grows. Installing new software often requires
the registry to grow in size. Removing software (and associated registry
entries) may allow the removed entries to be reused, however, this can
result in registry data being physically scattered all over the registry
and the hard drive. This translates to poor performance and an ever
growing registry. Typically, most desktop users experience a breaking
point every 18 to 36 months. This means, poor system performance,
registry and/or filesystem corruption, and system stabiity issues. Many
shops will simply "ghost" a copy onto systems every 12 - 18 months just to
avoid the headaches. This often fixes many random and odd problems,
which older systems tend to experience. The exact window generally
relates to the number of applications which have been installed and/or
removed and the associated order in which such actions occurred. Not to
mention the effort which has been placed on the system to maintain a
current patch level and frequency at which service packs have been
installed and maintained.

If your friend's original installation is older than 18 to 35 months,
especially if he's experienced filesystem corruption in the past, a fresh
installation of the OS on up, should be considered. While time consuming
and a headache to backup and restore old data and applications, users are
often rewarded with stability and speed over the next 18 to 36 months. At
which time, you're usually good for another rinse and repeat cycle.

If you friend was experiencing some of these problems in the past, simply
migrating these problems to a new drive can be very frustrating. As such,
replacing an old drive with a new drive often makes for an excellent
window to start afresh again.

While I certainly would not say that any of this is required, I would
recommend that it should be considered.

Cheers and good luck! Sorry to hear that your friend is having so many
problems.

Greg

On Thu, 20 May 2004 23:41:50 +0000, Derek wrote:

Hi Greg,

Many thanks for your detailed help.

My friend has done as you say, and let the file checker do its stuff which
it did succesfully, and he can now boot up normally.

He has also solved some of his probs with FS2004 but has a gut feeling it
still wasnt running as it should.

So he has now taken his PC back to the shop, and they are formatting the
hard drive they only just installed the other day. Amongst other things,
even when he had his OLD hard drive we think there was something wrong in
his registry, that was blocking certain volumes of the "Just Flight VFR
Scenery" package series for FS2002/4 being installed.

His PC was due back from the shop today, but he hasnt phoned me so I presume
there has been a delay.

Thanks for all your help my friend

Derek
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:48:03 +0000, Derek wrote:


1. On boot up, his PC (he is using Windows XP), starts giving "file
.
.
.
How does he stop his PC attempting to go through the above lengthy
process
each time on boot up ? Does he have to let it go through the complete
procedure at least once ? After that should he no longer get the warning
?


Yes. The drive is marked as "dirty" until it's able to complete this
diagnostic and correct step. It will be marked "clean" once it completes.
After which, assuming nothing else funky is going on here, it should boot
without requiring this step.

I should also point out that if he does have file system problems,
continued use of the filesystem while it damage can greatly extend the
damage to the filesystem. It's very possible to much, much worse off if
he continues to ignore this problem.

If the system is identifying cross-linked files, it's telling you that you
have some form of filesystem corruption. It's important that you let the
system fix what it can. It's also important to realize that some files
may be damaged beyond repair. The repair process only works to get the
filesystem repaired and properly layed out. Once the filesystem is in a
known good state, it's still possible to have files which remained
damaged. Worse, the process of repairing the filesystem can actually
damage some files. The details and extent of any possible damage and the
degree at which that damage can be repaired greatly depends on the nature
of the filesystem damage and the types of file activity that has been done
post-damage.

If possible, he REALLY needs to convert his filesystem to NTFS. NTFS is
much, much better than FAT. FAT is used by anyone that is begging to
suffer from filesystem corruption. FAT also suffers from very, very long
consistency checks. NTFS is a journaled filesystem, which means it always
attempts to keep the filesystem in good order without requiring a fsck to
be done on it. At worst, in bad situations, NTFS may still be checked but
the speed is mucho, mucho faster than the checks required for FAT. Best
of all, if the drive is very large and he converts to NTFS, he should gain
a fair amount of additional drive space back for actual file use. FAT is
horribly wasteful of allocated file space.

Hope this helps!

Cheers!


References:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...convertfat.asp

There is actually quite a bit of software out there that will shrink the registry by removing deleted and broken
registry links. If anyone can't find it I'll dig out URL's and post them.

--
....Carl Frisk
Anger is a brief madness.
- Horace, 20 B.C.
http://www.carlfrisk.com


"Greg Copeland" wrote in message news
Ah, the registry. The registry is only of Microsoft's biggests curses
placed on their own platform. The registry only, ever grows in size and
can not be shrunk once it grows. Installing new software often requires
the registry to grow in size. Removing software (and associated registry
entries) may allow the removed entries to be reused, however, this can
result in registry data being physically scattered all over the registry
and the hard drive. This translates to poor performance and an ever
growing registry. Typically, most desktop users experience a breaking
point every 18 to 36 months. This means, poor system performance,
registry and/or filesystem corruption, and system stabiity issues. Many
shops will simply "ghost" a copy onto systems every 12 - 18 months just to
avoid the headaches. This often fixes many random and odd problems,
which older systems tend to experience. The exact window generally
relates to the number of applications which have been installed and/or
removed and the associated order in which such actions occurred. Not to
mention the effort which has been placed on the system to maintain a
current patch level and frequency at which service packs have been
installed and maintained.

If your friend's original installation is older than 18 to 35 months,
especially if he's experienced filesystem corruption in the past, a fresh
installation of the OS on up, should be considered. While time consuming
and a headache to backup and restore old data and applications, users are
often rewarded with stability and speed over the next 18 to 36 months. At
which time, you're usually good for another rinse and repeat cycle.

If you friend was experiencing some of these problems in the past, simply
migrating these problems to a new drive can be very frustrating. As such,
replacing an old drive with a new drive often makes for an excellent
window to start afresh again.

While I certainly would not say that any of this is required, I would
recommend that it should be considered.

Cheers and good luck! Sorry to hear that your friend is having so many
problems.

Greg

On Thu, 20 May 2004 23:41:50 +0000, Derek wrote:

Hi Greg,

Many thanks for your detailed help.

My friend has done as you say, and let the file checker do its stuff which
it did succesfully, and he can now boot up normally.

He has also solved some of his probs with FS2004 but has a gut feeling it
still wasnt running as it should.

So he has now taken his PC back to the shop, and they are formatting the
hard drive they only just installed the other day. Amongst other things,
even when he had his OLD hard drive we think there was something wrong in
his registry, that was blocking certain volumes of the "Just Flight VFR
Scenery" package series for FS2002/4 being installed.

His PC was due back from the shop today, but he hasnt phoned me so I presume
there has been a delay.

Thanks for all your help my friend

Derek
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:48:03 +0000, Derek wrote:


1. On boot up, his PC (he is using Windows XP), starts giving "file
.
.
.
How does he stop his PC attempting to go through the above lengthy
process
each time on boot up ? Does he have to let it go through the complete
procedure at least once ? After that should he no longer get the warning
?


Yes. The drive is marked as "dirty" until it's able to complete this
diagnostic and correct step. It will be marked "clean" once it completes.
After which, assuming nothing else funky is going on here, it should boot
without requiring this step.

I should also point out that if he does have file system problems,
continued use of the filesystem while it damage can greatly extend the
damage to the filesystem. It's very possible to much, much worse off if
he continues to ignore this problem.

If the system is identifying cross-linked files, it's telling you that you
have some form of filesystem corruption. It's important that you let the
system fix what it can. It's also important to realize that some files
may be damaged beyond repair. The repair process only works to get the
filesystem repaired and properly layed out. Once the filesystem is in a
known good state, it's still possible to have files which remained
damaged. Worse, the process of repairing the filesystem can actually
damage some files. The details and extent of any possible damage and the
degree at which that damage can be repaired greatly depends on the nature
of the filesystem damage and the types of file activity that has been done
post-damage.

If possible, he REALLY needs to convert his filesystem to NTFS. NTFS is
much, much better than FAT. FAT is used by anyone that is begging to
suffer from filesystem corruption. FAT also suffers from very, very long
consistency checks. NTFS is a journaled filesystem, which means it always
attempts to keep the filesystem in good order without requiring a fsck to
be done on it. At worst, in bad situations, NTFS may still be checked but
the speed is mucho, mucho faster than the checks required for FAT. Best
of all, if the drive is very large and he converts to NTFS, he should gain
a fair amount of additional drive space back for actual file use. FAT is
horribly wasteful of allocated file space.

Hope this helps!

Cheers!


References:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...convertfat.asp

On Mon, 24 May 2004 07:36:03 +0000, Carl Frisk wrote:

There is actually quite a bit of software out there that will shrink the registry by removing deleted and broken
registry links. If anyone can't find it I'll dig out URL's and post them.

The problem with those is that many can not be trusted to reliably
function and it's not uncommon for them to break applications. Some
systems (and it's applications) work great with them. Other systems,
start to fail is strange and odd ways without easily identified causes.

For these reasons, I would never recommend such a tool to anyone other
than a power user or a non-power user without dedicated desktop support
willing to wade in deep to troubleshoot. I can't stress enough the need
for a proper registry backup, in the event that a user decides to go down
this path.

In short, use with caution!

After all that, that only addresses the issue of an ever growing registry
and associated performance issues. It does not address general registry
corruption. Having said, the use of these applications have been a known
cause for computer user happiness.

In short, use with caution!

Cheers!