The Value Of Self-Healing

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jon
  • Start date Start date
J

Jon

I was looking through the new options available with the 'fsutil' command in
Vista (as you do), and stumbled across this little chap.

fsutil repair

eg

C:\Windows\system32>fsutil repair query c:
Self healing is enabled for volume c: with flags 0x1.
flags: 1 - enable general repair
8 - warn about potential data loss


Is self-healing an indispensable option to keep enabled, or is there a
performance impact involved? Would there any value in disabling it for a
particular volume (and say replacing it with a traditional scheduled
'chkdsk' check)?

I tried disabling it, and didn't notice any immediate catastrophic effect.

Ran across this article which also provides some background.

Self-Healing NTFS
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windo...3668-4e15-b7ad-4df0f6e6805d1033.mspx?mfr=true


Thanks for any thoughts.
 
My comment is: Why would one want to disable a function that helps the
system to run in a more reliable condition?

Guess I am a type of person who just doesn't get human nature.

As I have stated, oh so many times, in these newsgroups: The worst enemy of
any running computer is the person at the keyboard! Cause of errors = 99% of
all known problems

We ask people who have a multitude of problems - "What have you done to
alter your system?" They come back with, "I didn't do anything!"

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
 
Richard Urban said:
My comment is: Why would one want to disable a function that helps the
system to run in a more reliable condition?
Click to expand...


Thanks Richard.

It does seem to be good thing. I've noticed that a boot time chkdsk runs
much much faster with Vista. Whether that's related to this particular
feature, though, I don't know.


Guess I am a type of person who just doesn't get human nature.

As I have stated, oh so many times, in these newsgroups: The worst enemy
of any running computer is the person at the keyboard! Cause of errors =
99% of all known problems

We ask people who have a multitude of problems - "What have you done to
alter your system?" They come back with, "I didn't do anything!"
Click to expand...

True. Very easy to forget changes that have been made in the past.

I suppose I have a 'need for speed' tendency (of the legal variety) - but
since I've not heard of ,or observed, any major performance hit from having
it enabled, I suspect I'll be leaving it on.
 
Do you remember Win9x days. If you just pulled the plug on a running
computer you would cause all sorts of damage, up to and including losing the
operating system. You had to sit through a lengthy scandisk that usually did
nothing but destroy your files.

Pull the plug on a computer with either Windows XP or Vista. I have yet to
see any system damage when this is done by mistake.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
 
True, and progress over the ZX81 where a slight jolt to the machine would
mean complete loss of data, and another 5 minutes loading a 1K program from
a tape recorder. Mind you, you never lost the operating system from that
machine - I'll say that much for it.

--
Jon


Richard Urban said:
Do you remember Win9x days. If you just pulled the plug on a running
computer you would cause all sorts of damage, up to and including losing
the operating system. You had to sit through a lengthy scandisk that
usually did nothing but destroy your files.

Pull the plug on a computer with either Windows XP or Vista. I have yet to
see any system damage when this is done by mistake.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
Click to expand...
 
Hi, Jon.

Or for the original TRS-80. ;^} You couldn't lose the operating system
because the whole thing (plus BASIC) was in the ROM (4 KB?). And all
programs were safe on their music cassettes - unless they got too close to a
magnet - or the tape drive ate them.

But, Vista IS an improvement over that. ;<)

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(e-mail address removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP
(Running Windows Live Mail desktop beta in Vista Ultimate x64)
 
Thanks RC. Sounds similar.

Funnily enough it struck me after I'd posted that, that in some ways the
current trend is back towards the old fixed rom once again - thinking of the
desire to 'lock down the kernel', the climate of paranoia over system
security etc . After all, despite its limitations, it was *the* completely
secure operating system.

Can't really see things ever regressing completely back to the untweakable
rom, which would be pretty boring to put it mildly, but who knows.
 
Back
Top