Search Results

Search found 12264 results on 491 pages for 'drive letter'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 128/491 | < Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >

  • Ubuntu hard disk getting SATA errors

    - by Henadzy
    I am getting "UNC" errors on a hard disk on Ubuntu 9.10. It slows down my system, applications have not been responding for a long time. But when I mount the filesystem on another computer, it works properly. disk: SAMSUNG HD161HJ (SATA) syslog: Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773839] ata3.00: exception Emask 0x1 SAct 0x1e SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773845] ata3.00: Ata error. fis:0x21 Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773861] ata3.00: cmd 60/08:08:3f:00:ad/00:00:10:00:00/40 tag 1 ncq 4096 in Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773864] res 51/40:24:67:c8:91/40:00:05:00:00/40 Emask 0x9 (media error) Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773871] ata3.00: status: { DRDY ERR } Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773877] ata3.00: error: { UNC } [...snip 3 similar repeats of last 4 lines; see revision history for full log...] Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773970] ata3: hard resetting link Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 885.773974] ata3: nv: skipping hardreset on occupied port Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 886.240073] ata3: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 886.256277] ata3.00: configured for UDMA/133 Apr 25 00:28:25 vare6gin kernel: [ 886.256305] ata3: EH complete Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176088] ata3: EH in SWNCQ mode,QC:qc_active 0xF sactive 0xF Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176099] ata3: SWNCQ:qc_active 0xF defer_bits 0x0 last_issue_tag 0x3 Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176102] dhfis 0xF dmafis 0x1 sdbfis 0x0 Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176109] ata3: ATA_REG 0x51 ERR_REG 0x40 Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176113] ata3: tag : dhfis dmafis sdbfis sacitve Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176120] ata3: tag 0x0: 1 1 0 1 Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176126] ata3: tag 0x1: 1 0 0 1 Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176131] ata3: tag 0x2: 1 0 0 1 Apr 25 00:28:27 vare6gin kernel: [ 888.176136] ata3: tag 0x3: 1 0 0 1

    Read the article

  • Seriousness of a "Smart" disk error. How long will it last?

    - by Workshop Alex
    I have an 1 TB data disk and the bios and Windows are reporting a "Smart" error. At least, I get a Smart event but it doesn't indicate how serious the failure could be. My system is about 6 months old, including the disk so the warranty will cover the damage. Unfortunately, I lack a second disk of 1 TB in size which I can use to make a full backup. The most important data on this disk is safe, but there's a lot of work data which can be regenerated but this would cost a lot of time. So I ordered an USB disk of 1 TB which will arrive in three days. By then I can make a full backup of the data and afterwards, it can crash. But will the disk live that long? (Well, I won't use the PC as long as I can't make a backup.) How serious is such a Smart event? I know it's serious enough to have it replaced, but will it live for another week or could it die any moment?Update: I purchased an 1 TB external disk and spent most of the day making a backup of the 1 TB disk. It survived that. I then received a new disk, since it was still under warranty and replaced the hard disk. Then I had to spend most of a day again to put back the backup. I need to send back the faulty disk and now have an additional external disk, which could always be practical. :-) The Smart Error report did not cause any failures on the original disk. I won't advise to ignore these warnings, but the disk still has enough life in it to last a few more days. (Just make sure you have a good back-up.) And oh, the horror of having to make a complete backup such a huge disk. :-) If your data is important, make sure you have something that supports incremental backups and lots of space. (In my case, the data wasn't very important, just practical to have on-disk together.)

    Read the article

  • Cannot extend existing data disk over 2TB on windows 2008 with dynamic and gpt part

    - by DJYod
    As my D: disk is almost full (2TB) I extended the FC lun to 2.5TB. The new 500Go are seen by windows as "Unalloacted" as expected. I tried to extend the volume but windows says "The is not enough space available on the disk(s) to complete this operation" I read on the web that the disk should be configured as GPT and as a dynamic and it's already a dynamic gpt disk... How can I extend my disk without any data loss? My operating system is Windows 2008 R2 x64 SP1 and the SAN a 3PAR I hope someone can help me :) Thank you very much

    Read the article

  • mdadm: Win7-install created a boot partition on one of my RAID6 drives. How to rebuild?

    - by EXIT_FAILURE
    My problem happened when I attempted to install Windows 7 on it's own SSD. The Linux OS I used which has knowledge of the software RAID system is on a SSD that I disconnected prior to the install. This was so that windows (or I) wouldn't inadvertently mess it up. However, and in retrospect, foolishly, I left the RAID disks connected, thinking that windows wouldn't be so ridiculous as to mess with a HDD that it sees as just unallocated space. Boy was I wrong! After copying over the installation files to the SSD (as expected and desired), it also created an ntfs partition on one of the RAID disks. Both unexpected and totally undesired! . I changed out the SSDs again, and booted up in linux. mdadm didn't seem to have any problem assembling the array as before, but if I tried to mount the array, I got the error message: mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md0, missing codepage or helper program, or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so dmesg: EXT4-fs (md0): ext4_check_descriptors: Block bitmap for group 0 not in group (block 1318081259)! EXT4-fs (md0): group descriptors corrupted! I then used qparted to delete the newly created ntfs partition on /dev/sdd so that it matched the other three /dev/sd{b,c,e}, and requested a resync of my array with echo repair > /sys/block/md0/md/sync_action This took around 4 hours, and upon completion, dmesg reports: md: md0: requested-resync done. A bit brief after a 4-hour task, though I'm unsure as to where other log files exist (I also seem to have messed up my sendmail configuration). In any case: No change reported according to mdadm, everything checks out. mdadm -D /dev/md0 still reports: Version : 1.2 Creation Time : Wed May 23 22:18:45 2012 Raid Level : raid6 Array Size : 3907026848 (3726.03 GiB 4000.80 GB) Used Dev Size : 1953513424 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Mon May 26 12:41:58 2014 State : clean Active Devices : 4 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 4K Name : okamilinkun:0 UUID : 0c97ebf3:098864d8:126f44e3:e4337102 Events : 423 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 16 0 active sync /dev/sdb 1 8 32 1 active sync /dev/sdc 2 8 48 2 active sync /dev/sdd 3 8 64 3 active sync /dev/sde Trying to mount it still reports: mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md0, missing codepage or helper program, or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so and dmesg: EXT4-fs (md0): ext4_check_descriptors: Block bitmap for group 0 not in group (block 1318081259)! EXT4-fs (md0): group descriptors corrupted! I'm a bit unsure where to proceed from here, and trying stuff "to see if it works" is a bit too risky for me. This is what I suggest I should attempt to do: Tell mdadm that /dev/sdd (the one that windows wrote into) isn't reliable anymore, pretend it is newly re-introduced to the array, and reconstruct its content based on the other three drives. I also could be totally wrong in my assumptions, that the creation of the ntfs partition on /dev/sdd and subsequent deletion has changed something that cannot be fixed this way. My question: Help, what should I do? If I should do what I suggested , how do I do that? From reading documentation, etc, I would think maybe: mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --set-faulty /dev/sdd mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --remove /dev/sdd mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --re-add /dev/sdd However, the documentation examples suggest /dev/sdd1, which seems strange to me, as there is no partition there as far as linux is concerned, just unallocated space. Maybe these commands won't work without. Maybe it makes sense to mirror the partition table of one of the other raid devices that weren't touched, before --re-add. Something like: sfdisk -d /dev/sdb | sfdisk /dev/sdd Bonus question: Why would the Windows 7 installation do something so st...potentially dangerous? Update I went ahead and marked /dev/sdd as faulty, and removed it (not physically) from the array: # mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --set-faulty /dev/sdd # mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --remove /dev/sdd However, attempting to --re-add was disallowed: # mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --re-add /dev/sdd mdadm: --re-add for /dev/sdd to /dev/md0 is not possible --add, was fine. # mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --add /dev/sdd mdadm -D /dev/md0 now reports the state as clean, degraded, recovering, and /dev/sdd as spare rebuilding. /proc/mdstat shows the recovery progress: md0 : active raid6 sdd[4] sdc[1] sde[3] sdb[0] 3907026848 blocks super 1.2 level 6, 4k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UU_U] [>....................] recovery = 2.1% (42887780/1953513424) finish=348.7min speed=91297K/sec nmon also shows expected output: ¦sdb 0% 87.3 0.0| > |¦ ¦sdc 71% 109.1 0.0|RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR > |¦ ¦sdd 40% 0.0 87.3|WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW > |¦ ¦sde 0% 87.3 0.0|> || It looks good so far. Crossing my fingers for another five+ hours :) Update 2 The recovery of /dev/sdd finished, with dmesg output: [44972.599552] md: md0: recovery done. [44972.682811] RAID conf printout: [44972.682815] --- level:6 rd:4 wd:4 [44972.682817] disk 0, o:1, dev:sdb [44972.682819] disk 1, o:1, dev:sdc [44972.682820] disk 2, o:1, dev:sdd [44972.682821] disk 3, o:1, dev:sde Attempting mount /dev/md0 reports: mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md0, missing codepage or helper program, or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so And on dmesg: [44984.159908] EXT4-fs (md0): ext4_check_descriptors: Block bitmap for group 0 not in group (block 1318081259)! [44984.159912] EXT4-fs (md0): group descriptors corrupted! I'm not sure what do do now. Suggestions? Output of dumpe2fs /dev/md0: dumpe2fs 1.42.8 (20-Jun-2013) Filesystem volume name: Atlas Last mounted on: /mnt/atlas Filesystem UUID: e7bfb6a4-c907-4aa0-9b55-9528817bfd70 Filesystem magic number: 0xEF53 Filesystem revision #: 1 (dynamic) Filesystem features: has_journal ext_attr resize_inode dir_index filetype extent flex_bg sparse_super large_file huge_file uninit_bg dir_nlink extra_isize Filesystem flags: signed_directory_hash Default mount options: user_xattr acl Filesystem state: clean Errors behavior: Continue Filesystem OS type: Linux Inode count: 244195328 Block count: 976756712 Reserved block count: 48837835 Free blocks: 92000180 Free inodes: 243414877 First block: 0 Block size: 4096 Fragment size: 4096 Reserved GDT blocks: 791 Blocks per group: 32768 Fragments per group: 32768 Inodes per group: 8192 Inode blocks per group: 512 RAID stripe width: 2 Flex block group size: 16 Filesystem created: Thu May 24 07:22:41 2012 Last mount time: Sun May 25 23:44:38 2014 Last write time: Sun May 25 23:46:42 2014 Mount count: 341 Maximum mount count: -1 Last checked: Thu May 24 07:22:41 2012 Check interval: 0 (<none>) Lifetime writes: 4357 GB Reserved blocks uid: 0 (user root) Reserved blocks gid: 0 (group root) First inode: 11 Inode size: 256 Required extra isize: 28 Desired extra isize: 28 Journal inode: 8 Default directory hash: half_md4 Directory Hash Seed: e177a374-0b90-4eaa-b78f-d734aae13051 Journal backup: inode blocks dumpe2fs: Corrupt extent header while reading journal super block

    Read the article

  • Why is USB-sticks so much slower than Solid State Drives?

    - by Jonas
    From what I understand, USB flash memory and Solid State Drives are based on similar technologies, NAND flash memory. But USB-sticks is usually quite slow with a read and write speed of 5-10MB per second while Solid State Drives usually is very fast, usually 100-570MB per second. Why are Solid State Drives so much faster than USB-sticks? And why isn't USB-sticks faster than 5-10MB per second? Is it simply that SSD-drives uses parallel access to the NAND flash memory or are there other reasons?

    Read the article

  • Access denied to external USB disk; update access rights fails in Windows 8

    - by gerard
    I use to work with 2 laptops (Windows vista and Windows 7), my work files being on an external usb disk. My oldest laptop broke down, so I bought a new one. I had no option other than take Windows 8. I suspect something changed with access rights, as my external disk suffered some "access denied" problem on Windows. I was prompted (by Windows 8) somehow to fix the access rights, which I tried to do, getting to the properties - security. This process was very slow and ended up saying disk is not ready Additionally, my external usb disk somehow was not recognized anymore. Back to Windows 7, I was warned that my disk needed to be verified, which I did. In this process, some files were lost (most of them I could recover from the folder found00x, but I have some backup anyway). Also, I don't know why, but under Windows 7, all the folder showed with a lock. Then back again to Windows 8. Same problem : access denied to my disk + no way to change access rights as it gets stuck disk is not ready". Now I am pretty sure there is some kind of bug or inconsistency in Windows 8 / Windows 7. I did 2. and 3. a few times. At some point, I also got an access denied in Windows 7. I could restore access rights to the disk to "System" (properties - security - EDIT for full control to group "system". ). But then I still get the same access right pb on Windows 8, and getting stuck in the process to restore full control to "system" -- and "admin" groups. I upgraded Windows8 with the Windows8 updates available. Does not help.

    Read the article

  • Prevent Windows 7 from unpluging External HDD

    - by marverix
    I have installed Windows 7 as my media server. I pluged in 500GB external HDD via USB. I have changed power plan to Best Performance and changed advenced power settings to never turn off HDD etc. I even yesterday wrote powershell script (create and delete folder on this disk) and I have added it to harmonogram to run every 5 minutes starting from system boot. And nothing! Disk after some time (I realy can't say when) is turning off and Windows show "Unknown Device" in Device Manager. Then only system reboot or disk reboot helps. Any ideas how to prevent Windows 7 from stopping my external HDD? Cheers!

    Read the article

  • attach two hdds to a computer having 500W smps

    - by Gaurav Sharma
    I have a desktop system installed with a 250 GB hdd (seagate sata II) this system is having a power supply of 500W (not sure if it is 650W but not more than that) the power supply is a local brand. Will it be safe to attach a second 250 GB sata II hdd on the same system. Safe in the sense that the system may not fall short of power at any time. My system's config is as follows Core2Duo processor Mercury cabinet having an additional fan (small one) sata dvd writer 52X windows xp sp 2 ASUS motherboard (intel G965 express chipset) If the above specified power supply is not sufficient for above configuration of system then please suggest the appropriate power supply (including watts)

    Read the article

  • Is ECC mandatory in SSD technology?

    - by Alexander Shcheblikin
    While shopping for an SSD I have noticed that some manufacturers promote their "Pro" models as the ones sporting ECC data protection. Those manufacturers do not mention ECC in their budget models descriptions. However, Wikipedia article on flash memory states that "NAND relies on ECC to compensate for bits that may spontaneously fail during normal device operation." So the question is does any SSD device use ECC behind the scenes for its normal operation and is that ECC "feature" just a marketing ploy?

    Read the article

  • Cannot boot from Yumi multiboot USB stick

    - by Amator
    I've just created a multiboot USB stick using Yumi. I tried to start my notebook (Asus K70IO) using it, but all I see is just a black screen with blinking underscore even after waiting for minutes. If during this time I remove the USB stick I get the message: "Operating system load error". How do I properly load my Yumi USB stick and use it? I've tried formatting it using Yumi's checkbox to format the stick in FAT32 too, but it didn't help. Now I tried to use Sardu 2.0.5 and met same problem: black screen and blinkin underscore, if I remove stick I see "Operating system load error" and my OS starts to boot. At the same time if I create bootable USB stick from ISO using UltraISO it boots smoothly.

    Read the article

  • How can a single disk in a hardware SATA RAID-10 array bring the entire array to a screeching halt?

    - by Stu Thompson
    Prelude: I'm a code-monkey that's increasingly taken on SysAdmin duties for my small company. My code is our product, and increasingly we provide the same app as SaaS. About 18 months ago I moved our servers from a premium hosting centric vendor to a barebones rack pusher in a tier IV data center. (Literally across the street.) This ment doing much more ourselves--things like networking, storage and monitoring. As part the big move, to replace our leased direct attached storage from the hosting company, I built a 9TB two-node NAS based on SuperMicro chassises, 3ware RAID cards, Ubuntu 10.04, two dozen SATA disks, DRBD and . It's all lovingly documented in three blog posts: Building up & testing a new 9TB SATA RAID10 NFSv4 NAS: Part I, Part II and Part III. We also setup a Cacit monitoring system. Recently we've been adding more and more data points, like SMART values. I could not have done all this without the awesome boffins at ServerFault. It's been a fun and educational experience. My boss is happy (we saved bucket loads of $$$), our customers are happy (storage costs are down), I'm happy (fun, fun, fun). Until yesterday. Outage & Recovery: Some time after lunch we started getting reports of sluggish performance from our application, an on-demand streaming media CMS. About the same time our Cacti monitoring system sent a blizzard of emails. One of the more telling alerts was a graph of iostat await. Performance became so degraded that Pingdom began sending "server down" notifications. The overall load was moderate, there was not traffic spike. After logging onto the application servers, NFS clients of the NAS, I confirmed that just about everything was experiencing highly intermittent and insanely long IO wait times. And once I hopped onto the primary NAS node itself, the same delays were evident when trying to navigate the problem array's file system. Time to fail over, that went well. Within 20 minuts everything was confirmed to be back up and running perfectly. Post-Mortem: After any and all system failures I perform a post-mortem to determine the cause of the failure. First thing I did was ssh back into the box and start reviewing logs. It was offline, completely. Time for a trip to the data center. Hardware reset, backup an and running. In /var/syslog I found this scary looking entry: Nov 15 06:49:44 umbilo smartd[2827]: Device: /dev/twa0 [3ware_disk_00], 6 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors Nov 15 06:49:44 umbilo smartd[2827]: Device: /dev/twa0 [3ware_disk_07], SMART Prefailure Attribute: 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate changed from 171 to 170 Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: Device: /dev/twa0 [3ware_disk_10], 16 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: Device: /dev/twa0 [3ware_disk_10], 4 Offline uncorrectable sectors Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: Num Test_Description Status Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: # 1 Short offline Completed: read failure 90% 6576 3421766910 Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: # 2 Short offline Completed: read failure 90% 6087 3421766910 Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: # 3 Short offline Completed: read failure 10% 5901 656821791 Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: # 4 Short offline Completed: read failure 90% 5818 651637856 Nov 15 06:49:45 umbilo smartd[2827]: So I went to check the Cacti graphs for the disks in the array. Here we see that, yes, disk 7 is slipping away just like syslog says it is. But we also see that disk 8's SMART Read Erros are fluctuating. There are no messages about disk 8 in syslog. More interesting is that the fluctuating values for disk 8 directly correlate to the high IO wait times! My interpretation is that: Disk 8 is experiencing an odd hardware fault that results in intermittent long operation times. Somehow this fault condition on the disk is locking up the entire array Maybe there is a more accurate or correct description, but the net result has been that the one disk is impacting the performance of the whole array. The Question(s) How can a single disk in a hardware SATA RAID-10 array bring the entire array to a screeching halt? Am I being naïve to think that the RAID card should have dealt with this? How can I prevent a single misbehaving disk from impacting the entire array? Am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • Is really good have a big (500GB/1T) Hard Disk as main one!?

    - by aSeptik
    Hi All guys! ;-) i'm building my new PC so i'm starting the usual search for a good hardware/price around the net! but this time i'm not sure i want buy a big Hard Disk! i was thinking to have a "very small" HD like 50GB as main one and external (big) for store all other stuff! Assuming i'm using classic slow softwares like adobe suite (photoshop, flash, autodesk) and some very simple soft like notepad, php and so on...! do you think this is a good practice for improve performance/speed or i'm jast saying some stupid thing!?

    Read the article

  • Is really good have a big (500GB/1T) Hard Disk as main one!?

    - by aSeptik
    Hi All guys! ;-) i'm building my new PC so i'm starting the usual search for a good hardware/price around the net! but this time i'm not sure i want buy a big Hard Disk! i was thinking to have a "very small" HD like 50GB as main one and external (big) for store all other stuff! Assuming i'm using classic slow softwares like adobe suite (photoshop, flash, autodesk) and some very simple soft like notepad, php and so on...! do you think this is a good practice for improve performance/speed or i'm jast saying some stupid thing!?

    Read the article

  • How to clone a HDD and then use the clone with VMware (so that Windows works!)?

    - by Ahmad
    I have a system on which Windows 7 is installed, and I am trying to make a clone of its HDD image, which I then want to use in my main PC with VMware, so that I can boot Windows 7 off the cloned HDD. I used Ultimate Boot CD v5.1.1 with the system whose HDD I wanted to clone, and I cloned it using EaseUs Disk Copy, which comes with Ultimate Boot CD. The source HDD was 250 GB in size which had 3 partitions, while the USB HDD I attached to the system, which was supposed to be the destination/clone HDD, was 320 GB in size. I chose to create an exact replica, and so 250 GB worth of data (partitions, etc.) was copied exactly, and the rest of the space was un-allocated. I now connected this USB HDD to my main PC, fired up VMware Workstation 8 and defined a new Virtual Machine, and chose to boot off the USB HDD. Result is that when Windows is booting (from the cloned HDD inside VMware), I get the blue screen error before I reach the login screen. How can I change my methodology so that Windows even boots from the clone? I can change any tools I use, etc.

    Read the article

  • Safe BIOS upgrade run from external USB-HDD and not native OS

    - by ecoologic
    I have a Toshiba M200 laptop which came with Windows Vista. After buying it, I replaced the OS with XP and recently I swapped the internal hard disk with a bigger one where I only have Ubuntu. So now I can boot XP from the external USB hard disk. There's a BIOS update available (2.3 against my 1.8) which I'd like to install and there's also a version for XP. Is it "reasonably" safe to install this upgrade for Windows XP (despite the original OS was Vista, the laptop model is the right one) from my external USB hard disk with Win XP?

    Read the article

  • What are the replacement options for an IDE hard disk for a DOS based system?

    - by dummzeuch
    I have got a few "embedded" systems running MSDOS 6.2 which boot from and store data to IDE hard disks. Since these drives are nearing their end of life, the question arises how we can replace them. The requirements are: DOS must be able to install and boot from these drives. They must be able to sustain heavy (mostly) write access. If possible, they should be able to survive moderate vibrations (not too bad since the current hard disks have survived several years of that) I considered the following options so far: other ide hard drives: Unfortunately modern IDE drives are too large so DOS cannot boot from them even if I create small partitions. Older IDE drives are just that: old, so they are probably not the most reliable ones any more. SSDs: There are a few SSDs with IDE interface available. I have not yet tried them. Does anybody have any experience with them? They look like the ideal replacement provided that DOS can boot from them and that writing speed does not deteriorate too much (the old hard disks are no race cars either). Compact Flash: There are adapters for using CF with IDE controllers and they work fine. DOS can boot from them and they have no problems at all with vibrations. What I am not sure about is their durability. DOS uses FAT so some very few sectors are written every time the medium is being written to. IDE to SATA converters: I have no idea whether they are any good. Has anybody tried them? It might be an option to use one of these to connect an SATA SSD to the system. Are there any alternatives that I have missed? (We are working on replacing these systems, but it will still take a few years.)

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >