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.