Is this a corrupted hard drive ?

[tom.delorenzo]

Just moved a bunch of large files from my 40 GB main drive (c to my
250 GB secondary drive. (d After doing that, I went into the D: drive
to check the files and all of the folders had names that look like
another language when it can't be properly displayed - You know - boxes
and symbols, etc.

Anyway, I restarted the computer in hopes that the reboot would find
the drive and return things to normal. The machine started a scan which
says "Bad links in lost chain at cluster xxxxxx corrected. It has been
running for about 12 hours now and is up to cluster 1,420,000. At this
rate with the drive about half full I figure it will run for 4 more
days at least. I'm not shutting it down in hopes that it's actually
fixing something. I'm running XP - SP1 and both drives are FAT32. I
really don't want to partition and format the drive if I can help it.
This really seems like disk corruption, but I had no warning at all -
it just happened. When I viewed the S.M.A.R.T. properties a few days
ago everything was within limits. Any ideas on this would be greatly
appreciated. Thanks for your help.

- Tom D. -

 

[Rod Speed]

Just moved a bunch of large files from my 40 GB main drive (c
to my 250 GB secondary drive. (d After doing that, I went into
the D: drive to check the files and all of the folders had names
that look like another language when it can't be properly
displayed - You know - boxes and symbols, etc.

Anyway, I restarted the computer in hopes that the reboot would find
the drive and return things to normal. The machine started a scan
which says "Bad links in lost chain at cluster xxxxxx corrected. It
has been running for about 12 hours now and is up to cluster
1,420,000. At this rate with the drive about half full I figure it
will run for 4 more days at least. I'm not shutting it down in hopes
that it's actually fixing something.

Its likely screwing the drive contents very comprehensively indeed.

I'm running XP - SP1 and both drives are FAT32. I really
don't want to partition and format the drive if I can help it.
This really seems like disk corruption,

Too early to say yet.

but I had no warning at all - it just happened. When I viewed the
S.M.A.R.T. properties a few days ago everything was within limits.

Not all failures provide any warning.

Any ideas on this would be greatly appreciated.

If the files on that drive matter, I'd stop chkdsk before it ****s up anything more.

And then post the Everest SMART report here.
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=4181

 

[Arno Wagner]

Just moved a bunch of large files from my 40 GB main drive (c to my
250 GB secondary drive. (d After doing that, I went into the D: drive
to check the files and all of the folders had names that look like
another language when it can't be properly displayed - You know - boxes
and symbols, etc.

Anyway, I restarted the computer in hopes that the reboot would find
the drive and return things to normal. The machine started a scan which
says "Bad links in lost chain at cluster xxxxxx corrected. It has been
running for about 12 hours now and is up to cluster 1,420,000. At this
rate with the drive about half full I figure it will run for 4 more
days at least. I'm not shutting it down in hopes that it's actually
fixing something. I'm running XP - SP1 and both drives are FAT32. I
really don't want to partition and format the drive if I can help it.
This really seems like disk corruption, but I had no warning at all -
it just happened. When I viewed the S.M.A.R.T. properties a few days
ago everything was within limits. Any ideas on this would be greatly
appreciated. Thanks for your help.

First, the drive is most likely fine. Second, it is most likely
an OS problem, i.e. bug.

Was the gross MS incompetence that too large drives would have their
start overwritten eventually without any warning still present in SP1?
I don't quite remember.

If it is, then sorry, your data is gone, since the FAT of that drive
is gone. Also the only one to blame for this is Microsoft.
Unfortuunately you cannot sue a software maker for gross
incompetence....

Arno

 

[tom.delorenzo]

Its likely screwing the drive contents very comprehensively indeed.


Too early to say yet.


Not all failures provide any warning.


If the files on that drive matter, I'd stop chkdsk before it ****s up anything more.

And then post the Everest SMART report here.
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=4181

Thanks for the reply - I'll check out Everest SMART, I'm using Active
SMART now which has been reliable for me.

 

[tom.delorenzo]

First, the drive is most likely fine. Second, it is most likely
an OS problem, i.e. bug.

Was the gross MS incompetence that too large drives would have their
start overwritten eventually without any warning still present in SP1?
I don't quite remember.

If it is, then sorry, your data is gone, since the FAT of that drive
is gone. Also the only one to blame for this is Microsoft.
Unfortuunately you cannot sue a software maker for gross
incompetence....

Arno

Wasn't aware of that bug in SP1, but it sure looks like the FAT of the
drive is gone or corrupted. From what I can tell there is nothing
physically wrong with the drive, so I tend to think you're right. Guess
I've learned that I have to backup the drive more often ! Thanks for
your reply

 

[Michael Daly]

Wasn't aware of that bug in SP1, but it sure looks like the FAT of the
drive is gone or corrupted. From what I can tell there is nothing
physically wrong with the drive, so I tend to think you're right. Guess
I've learned that I have to backup the drive more often !

Actually, what you should have learned is to ensure that you are using the most
recent version of the OS, including all fixes to prevent hackers from getting
in. SP2 and all upgrades are available free online (assuming you have a legal
copy of the OS) and you can easily set up the machine to download and install
updates automatically and unattended. I know many corporations have stupid
rules about ensuring everyone uses a down-level version for corp-wide
compatibility, but real world computer users should be a lot more sensible and
cautious. Hope this doesn't sound too harsh, it's only intended to be stern
advice so you're protected from problems.

Mike

 

[Arno Wagner]

(e-mail address removed) wrote:

Actually, what you should have learned is to ensure that you are
using the most recent version of the OS, including all fixes to
prevent hackers from getting in. SP2 and all upgrades are available
free online (assuming you have a legal copy of the OS) and you can
easily set up the machine to download and install updates
automatically and unattended. I know many corporations have stupid
rules about ensuring everyone uses a down-level version for
corp-wide compatibility, but real world computer users should be a
lot more sensible and cautious. Hope this doesn't sound too harsh,
it's only intended to be stern advice so you're protected from
problems.

Well, quite frankly, this bug is so stupid and incompetent that
no user needs to expect it. In any decent implementation
you will have a check that does not let you use equipment
the code cannot deal with. Even more so in an extrememly
critical part like the storage layer.

Arno

 

[Arno Wagner]

Thanks for the reply - I'll check out Everest SMART, I'm using Active
SMART now which has been reliable for me.

Since the SMART tool only reports, while the disks do the checks
themselves, a switch should not change much.

Arno

 

[James Brown]

Since the SMART tool only reports, while the disks do the checks
themselves, a switch should not change much.

Active SMART claims to do more than JUST report what the drive reports.

 

[Rod Speed]

(e-mail address removed) wrote

Rod Speed wrote

Thanks for the reply - I'll check out Everest SMART,
I'm using Active SMART now which has been reliable for me.

You dont know that yet, it may have failed to warn
you about what it should have warned you about.

 

[Rod Speed]

Wasn't aware of that bug in SP1,

No such animal, its a figment of Arno's MS hating 'brain'

but it sure looks like the FAT of the drive is gone

It wont be gone, if it was gone, chkdsk wouldnt have run, it
would have said that the FAT is gone and would have given up.

or corrupted.

Definitely that.

From what I can tell there is nothing physically wrong with the drive,

You dont know that until you post that SMART data.

so I tend to think you're right.

Nope, he isnt.

Guess I've learned that I have to backup the drive more often !

You have indeed.

 

[Aidan Karley]

I know many corporations have stupid
rules about ensuring everyone uses a down-level version for corp-wide
compatibility, but real world computer users should be a lot more sensible and
cautious.

You're not losing (perfectly legal) machines to the WGA virus? Yet.