Search Results

Search found 10673 results on 427 pages for 'recovery disk'.

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 20/427 | < Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

  • Mac Disk-Utility input/output error

    - by Michelle
    a couple of other people have posted about this but my specific problem has not been addressed. For months I have been backing up DVDs and home movies with no problem then all of a sudden I get an "input/output" error. Yes I have cleaned the disks. Actually I have tried 8 different ones - they are not all bad so its obviously my computer. I have done a scan and cleaned up the HD a bit just in case but nothing is helping. I don't want to download other programs since this one works but seems to be having a problem. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Save Website To Disk

    - by Christian
    Hello everyone! I have a very poor internet connection when I'm living at home. The only time I have a good internet is at college. When I get home, the most mundane task like opening a web-page becomes a five minute stress-test. So what I was thinking was to download the web-page, for example superdickery. I was wondering what the best method would be to download the entire image archive of the page? Would this be illegal, if I did this? It's just that I don't want to be frustrated every time I just want to load a simple jpeg image.

    Read the article

  • Can't access USB drive anymore

    - by marie
    I have a 32 GB Lacie Cookey USB flash disk that doesn't show in the Computer window but it's visible as a device. cmd > diskpart DISKPART> list disk Disk ### Status Size -------- ------------- ------ Disk 0 Online 149 G Disk 1 No Media 0 DISKPART> select disk 1 Disk 1 is now the selected disk. DISKPART> clean Virtual Disk Service error: There is no media in the device. It also appears in the Disk Management tool, but the box is empty. Is there anything I can do or is it dead? ............................................................ output from ChipGenius: Description: [F:]USB Mass Storage Device(LaCie CooKey) Device Type: Mass Storage Device Protocal Version: USB 2.00 Current Speed: High Speed Max Current: 200mA USB Device ID: VID = 059F PID = 103B Serial Number: 070535924B170C18 Device Vendor: LaCie Device Name: CooKey Device Revision: 0100 Manufacturer: LaCie Product Model: CooKey Product Revision: PMAP Controller Vendor: Phison Controller Part-Number: PS2251-67(PS2267) - F/W 06.08.53 [2012-09-26] Flash ID code: 983AA892 - Toshiba [TLC] Tools on web: http://dl.mydigit.net/special/up/phison.html

    Read the article

  • Server nearly unusable when doing disk writes

    - by Wikser
    My question closely relates to my last question here on serverfault. I was copying about 5GB from a 10 year old desktop computer to the server. The copy was done in Windows Explorer. In this situation I would assume the server to be bored by the dataflow. But as usual with this server, it really slowed down. At least I could work with the remote session, even there was some serious latency. The copy took its time (20min?). In this time I went to a colleague and he tried to log in in the same server via remote desktop (for some other reason). It took about a minute to get to the login screen, a minute to open the control panel, a minute to open the performance monitor, ... Icons were loading maybe one per second. We saw the following (from memory): CPU: 2% Avg. Queue Length: 50 Pages/sec: 115 (?) There was no other considerable activity on the server. The server seldom serves some ASP.NET pages, which became also very slow in this time. The relevant configuration is as follows: Windows 2003 SEAGATE ST3500631NS (7200 rpm, 500 GB) LSI MegaRAID based RAID 5 4 disks, 1 hot spare Write Through No read-ahead Direct Cache Mode Harddisk-Cache-Mode: off Is this normal behaviour for such a configuration? What measurements could give further clues? Is it reasonable to reduce the priority of such copy I/O and favour other processes like the remote desktop? How would you do that? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • Testing for disk write

    - by Montecristo
    I'm writing an application for storing lots of images (size <5MB) on an ext3 filesystem, this is what I have for now. After some searching here on serverfault I have decided for a structure of directories like this: 000/000/000000001.jpg ... 236/519/236519107.jpg This structure will allow me to save up to 1'000'000'000 images as I'll store a max of 1'000 images in each leaf. I've created it, from a theoretical point of view seems ok to me (though I've no experience on this), but I want to find out what will happen when there will be directories full of files in there. A question about creating this structure: is it better to create it all in one go (takes approx 50 minutes on my pc) or should I create directories as they are needed? From a developer point of view I think the first option is better (no extra waiting time for the user), but from a sysadmin point of view, is this ok? I've thought I could do as if the filesystem is already under the running application, I'll make a script that will save images as fast as it can, monitoring things as follows: how much time does it take for an image to be saved when there is no or little space used? how does this change when the space starts to be used up? how much time does it take for an image to be read from a random leaf? Does this change a lot when there are lots of files? Does launching this command sync; echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches has any sense at all? Is this the only thing I have to do to have a clean start if I want to start over again with my tests? Do you have any suggestions or corrections?

    Read the article

  • Mounting an FTP as a virtual disk (FTPDrive analogue)

    - by axk
    FTPDrive has been a great utility for me, but it does not support 64bit Windows 7. The feature of FTPDrive that is useful for me is accesing files from an FTP as local files without pre-downloading so that I can preview and watch movies from a local FTP server without waiting for a full movie to get downloaded first. Do you know of any software which allows accessing files over FTP without pre-downloading? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Will my Lenovo One Key Recovery work if I install Ubuntu on my Ideapad U410?

    - by dostiharise
    I own a Lenovo Ideapad U410. Being a game developer the first thing that I wanted to do is install Ubuntu. But I don't want to lose the Windows 7 that ships with the laptop. So, I wanted to know if the Lenovo One Key Recovery mechanism is capable of restoring the Windows 7, from the hidden recovery partition, after I install Ubunutu and enable Grub boot loader? Note: I am already aware that an alternative would be to create Factory Restore disks, to restore when necessary. But I cannot immediately do it unless I buy an External DVD Burner.

    Read the article

  • the effect of large number of files on disk space in unix filesystems

    - by user46976
    If I have a text file in Unix that contains N-many independent entries (e.g. records about employees, where each employee has a separate record), is it expected that this file will take up less space than if I split the file into N files, each containing the entry for one employee? in other words, can one save significant space on unix file systems by concatenating many files together, or is the difference negligible? thanks.

    Read the article

  • Backup / Disaster Recovery, should I store RAR-compressed files?

    - by moraleida
    I'm in the process of recovering files from an accidentally formated Ext4 partition using Photorec. It had about 300Gb of data, of which I've already got hold of about 30Gb. So far, it seems to me that the recovery of RAR-compressed files has been much more successful than the recovery of individual uncompressed files and ZIP compressed files - in the sense that a lot of recovered files/zips were unreadable, and pretty much all of the RAR files were intact. Is there such a relation? Are RAR-compressed files really less prone to corruption and thus easier to recover?

    Read the article

  • Relayout LVM Disk

    - by Tom
    I have an Ubuntu 11.10 system with two 500GB disks. The partition tables look like this: /dev/sda1 primary 465.52GB /dev/sda2 extended 243.17MB -> /dev/sda5 logical 243.14MB /dev/sdb1 primary 465.76GB sda1 and sdb1 are in a single LVM physical volume group containing a single logical volume containing a single logical filesystem which is mounted as /. sda5 is mounted as /boot. The problem comes when I want to upgrade to Ubuntu 12.04, which requires at least 247MB free on /boot. So I need to reduce the size of sda1 so that I can increase the size of sda2 and sda5. How the heck do I do that? I can find how to shrink the logical volume group, but I'm not at all clear on how to clear out the end part of sda1 so that I can reduce the physical volume group. Does pvresize just deal with this automagically? Or is that wild wishful thinking? I guess the alternatives are to back everything up onto something or other and recreate the thing from scratch or find out whether GRUB2 supports using LVM for /boot.

    Read the article

  • Why is an Ext4 disk check so much faster than NTFS?

    - by Brendan Long
    I had a situation today where I restarted my computer and it said I needed to check the disk for consistancy. About 10 minutes later (at "1%" complete), I gave up and decided to let it run when I go home. For comparison, my home computer uses Ext4 for all of the partitions, and the disk checks (which run around once week) only take a couple seconds. I remember reading that having fast disk checks was a priority, but I don't know how they could do that. So, how does Ext4 do disk checks so fast? Is there some huge breakthrough in doing this after NTFS came out (~10 years ago)? Note: The NTFS disk is ~300 GB and the Ext4 disk is ~500 GB. Both are about half full.

    Read the article

  • Why is an Ext4 disk check so much faster than NTFS?

    - by Brendan Long
    I had a situation today where I restarted my computer and it said I needed to check the disk for consistancy. About 10 minutes later (at "1%" complete), I gave up and decided to let it run when I go home. For comparison, my home computer uses Ext4 for all of the partitions, and the disk checks (which run around once week) only take a couple seconds. I remember reading that having fast disk checks was a priority, but I don't know how they could do that. So, how does Ext4 do disk checks so fast? Is there some huge breakthrough in doing this after NTFS came out (~10 years ago)? Note: The NTFS disk is ~300 GB and the Ext4 disk is ~500 GB. Both are about half full.

    Read the article

  • GParted in UBUNTU shows entire disk as UNALLOCATED SPACE

    - by msPeachy
    Good day to everyone. I hope someone can help me with my problem. I have a dual boot Windows and Ubuntu system. I recently encountered an hd0 out of disk error and wasn't able to boot Ubuntu. So I booted into Windows, after 2 to 3 times of booting and rebooting Windows, I tried booting Ubuntu but still I get the hd0 out of disk error. I decided to run Ubuntu from LIVEUSB to try to fix my Ubuntu partition using GParted, but when I run GParted, it shows my entire disk as UNALLOCATED SPACE! The strange thing is that Nautilus still shows and mounts my partitions. Also every time I boot into Windows , my partitions exists and I am able to read and write to them. I have no idea what is wrong. Please help! I can't stand using Windows since most of the tools I use are in Ubuntu. I don't mind reinstalling Ubuntu. In fact I already tried reinstalling using the LIVEUSB but I wasn't able to, since GParted or the Ubuntu installer itself does not recognized my partitions and shows the entire disk as unallocated space. I am currently running Ubuntu from LIVEUSB. Here's the outpuf of sudo fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 320.1 GB, 320072933376 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders, total 625142448 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xb30ab30a Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 104869887 52433920 83 Linux /dev/sda2 104869888 105074687 102400 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda3 105074688 156149759 25537536 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda4 156151800 625153409 234500805 f W95 Ext'd (LBA) /dev/sda5 156151808 169156591 6502392 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda6 169158656 294991871 62916608 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda7 294993920 471037944 88022012+ 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda8 471041928 625121152 77039612+ 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT When I run, sudo parted -l, I got this error message: ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo parted -l Error: Can't have a partition outside the disk!

    Read the article

  • Need help with testdisk output

    - by dan
    I had (note the past tense) an ubuntu 12.04 system with separate partitions for the base and /home directories. It started acting wonky, so I decided to do a reinstall with 12.10, intending just to do a reinstall to the base partition. After several seconds, I realize that the installer was repartitioning the drive and reinstalling, so I pulled the power cord. I'm now trying to recover as much as I can with testdisk, but it seems that testdisk is finding 100 unique partitions when I run it - they mostly tend to be HFS+ or solaris /home (which I think is just an ext4; I've never had solaris on the machine). I've pasted an abbreviated version of the testdisk output below (first ~100 lines, and then ~100 lines from the middle of the output). Is there a way to combine or recreate the partitions and then data recovery, or some other way maximize what I can recover (ideally as much of the file system as possible)? I really only care about what was in the /home directory - I'd rather not use photorec since I don't have another 2 TB HD lying around to recover to. Thanks, Dan Mon Dec 10 06:03:00 2012 Command line: TestDisk TestDisk 6.13, Data Recovery Utility, November 2011 Christophe GRENIER <[email protected]> http://www.cgsecurity.org OS: Linux, kernel 3.2.34-std312-amd64 (#2 SMP Sat Nov 17 08:06:32 UTC 2012) x86_64 Compiler: GCC 4.4 Compilation date: 2012-11-27T22:44:52 ext2fs lib: 1.42.6, ntfs lib: libntfs-3g, reiserfs lib: 0.3.1-rc8, ewf lib: none /dev/sda: LBA, HPA, LBA48, DCO support /dev/sda: size 3907029168 sectors /dev/sda: user_max 3907029168 sectors /dev/sda: native_max 3907029168 sectors Warning: can't get size for Disk /dev/mapper/control - 0 B - CHS 1 1 1, sector size=512 /dev/sr0 is not an ATA disk Hard disk list Disk /dev/sda - 2000 GB / 1863 GiB - CHS 243201 255 63, sector size=512 - WDC WD20EARS-00J2GB0, S/N:WD-WCAYY0075071, FW:80.00A80 Disk /dev/sdb - 1013 MB / 967 MiB - CHS 1014 32 61, sector size=512 - Generic Flash Disk, FW:8.07 Disk /dev/sr0 - 367 MB / 350 MiB - CHS 179470 1 1 (RO), sector size=2048 - PLDS DVD+/-RW DH-16AAS, FW:JD12 Partition table type (auto): Intel Disk /dev/sda - 2000 GB / 1863 GiB - WDC WD20EARS-00J2GB0 Partition table type: EFI GPT Analyse Disk /dev/sda - 2000 GB / 1863 GiB - CHS 243201 255 63 Current partition structure: Bad GPT partition, invalid signature. search_part() Disk /dev/sda - 2000 GB / 1863 GiB - CHS 243201 255 63 recover_EXT2: s_block_group_nr=0/14880, s_mnt_count=5/4294967295, s_blocks_per_group=32768, s_inodes_per_group=8192 recover_EXT2: s_blocksize=4096 recover_EXT2: s_blocks_count 487593984 recover_EXT2: part_size 3900751872 MS Data 2048 3900753919 3900751872 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock, 1997 GB / 1860 GiB Linux Swap 3900755968 3907028975 6273008 SWAP2 version 1, 3211 MB / 3062 MiB Results P MS Data 2048 3900753919 3900751872 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock, 1997 GB / 1860 GiB P Linux Swap 3900755968 3907028975 6273008 SWAP2 version 1, 3211 MB / 3062 MiB interface_write() 1 P MS Data 2048 3900753919 3900751872 2 P Linux Swap 3900755968 3907028975 6273008 search_part() Disk /dev/sda - 2000 GB / 1863 GiB - CHS 243201 255 63 recover_EXT2: s_block_group_nr=0/14880, s_mnt_count=5/4294967295, s_blocks_per_group=32768, s_inodes_per_group=8192 recover_EXT2: s_blocksize=4096 recover_EXT2: s_blocks_count 487593984 recover_EXT2: part_size 3900751872 MS Data 2048 3900753919 3900751872 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock, 1997 GB / 1860 GiB block_group_nr 1 recover_EXT2: "e2fsck -b 32768 -B 4096 device" may be needed recover_EXT2: s_block_group_nr=1/14880, s_mnt_count=0/4294967295, s_blocks_per_group=32768, s_inodes_per_group=8192 recover_EXT2: s_blocksize=4096 recover_EXT2: s_blocks_count 487593984 recover_EXT2: part_size 3900751872 MS Data 2046 3900753917 3900751872 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock Backup superblock, 1997 GB / 1860 GiB block_group_nr 1 recover_EXT2: "e2fsck -b 32768 -B 4096 device" may be needed recover_EXT2: s_block_group_nr=1/14880, s_mnt_count=0/4294967295, s_blocks_per_group=32768, s_inodes_per_group=8192 recover_EXT2: s_blocksize=4096 recover_EXT2: s_blocks_count 487593984 recover_EXT2: part_size 3900751872 MS Data 2048 3900753919 3900751872 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock Backup superblock, 1997 GB / 1860 GiB block_group_nr 1 recover_EXT2: "e2fsck -b 32768 -B 4096 device" may be needed recover_EXT2: s_block_group_nr=1/14584, s_mnt_count=0/27, s_blocks_per_group=32768, s_inodes_per_group=8192 recover_EXT2: s_blocksize=4096 recover_EXT2: s_blocks_count 477915164 recover_EXT2: part_size 3823321312 MS Data 4094 3823325405 3823321312 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock Backup superblock, 1957 GB / 1823 GiB block_group_nr 1 ....snip...... MS Data 2046 3900753917 3900751872 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock Backup superblock, 1997 GB / 1860 GiB MS Data 2048 3900753919 3900751872 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock, 1997 GB / 1860 GiB MS Data 4094 3823325405 3823321312 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock Backup superblock, 1957 GB / 1823 GiB MS Data 4096 3823325407 3823321312 EXT4 Large file Sparse superblock Backup superblock, 1957 GB / 1823 GiB MS Data 7028840 7033383 4544 FAT12, 2326 KB / 2272 KiB Mac HFS 67856948 67862179 5232 HFS+ found using backup sector!, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67862176 67867407 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67862244 67867475 5232 HFS+ found using backup sector!, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67867404 67872635 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67867472 67872703 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67872700 67877931 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67937834 67948067 10234 [EasyInstall_OSX] HFS found using backup sector!, 5239 KB / 5117 KiB Mac HFS 67938012 67948155 10144 HFS+ found using backup sector!, 5193 KB / 5072 KiB Mac HFS 67948064 67958297 10234 [EasyInstall_OSX] HFS, 5239 KB / 5117 KiB Mac HFS 67948070 67958303 10234 [EasyInstall_OSX] HFS found using backup sector!, 5239 KB / 5117 KiB Mac HFS 67948152 67958295 10144 HFS+, 5193 KB / 5072 KiB Mac HFS 67958292 67968435 10144 HFS+, 5193 KB / 5072 KiB Mac HFS 67958300 67968533 10234 [EasyInstall_OSX] HFS, 5239 KB / 5117 KiB Mac HFS 67992596 67997827 5232 HFS+ found using backup sector!, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67997824 68003055 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 67997892 68003123 5232 HFS+ found using backup sector!, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 68003052 68008283 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 68003120 68008351 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Mac HFS 68008348 68013579 5232 HFS+, 2678 KB / 2616 KiB Solaris /home 84429840 123499141 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84429952 123499253 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84493136 123562437 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84493248 123562549 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84566088 123635389 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84566200 123635501 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84571232 123640533 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84571344 123640645 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84659952 123729253 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84660064 123729365 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84690504 123759805 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84690616 123759917 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84700424 123769725 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84700536 123769837 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84797720 123867021 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84797832 123867133 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84812544 123881845 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84812656 123881957 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84824552 123893853 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84824664 123893965 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84847528 123916829 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84847640 123916941 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84886840 123956141 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84886952 123956253 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84945488 124014789 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84945600 124014901 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84957992 124027293 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84958104 124027405 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84962240 124031541 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84962352 124031653 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84977168 124046469 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB Solaris /home 84977280 124046581 39069302 UFS1, 20 GB / 18 GiB MS Data 174395467 178483851 4088385 ..... snip (it keeps going on for quite a while)

    Read the article

  • iOS get file size on disk

    - by F2_CMD
    I'm trying to get the size on disk of a file in iOS using Objective C. As of now I've been able to get the actual size of the file and other file information using NSFileManager and then getting the attributes attributesOfItemAtPath:error but not the size on disk. I also tried getting the file size from struct stat but again it doesn't give me size on disk.I tried using NSTask to make a call to du -h but iOS didn't allow me to fork other processes. Any ideas are welcome :) I know this questions is similar to many others but the difference is that I'm trying to do this in iOS and most of the methods used in other systems don't work here. Thanks

    Read the article

  • OS X Hard drive recovery

    - by Adam
    I am trying to recover data from a bad Seagate 1TB hard drive in a 2010 iMac. One day the iMac wouldn't boot (stuck at gray screen on startup). I removed the hard drive from the iMac and connected it to a MacBook using a 3.5" HDD to USB adapter. The hard drive wouldn't mount but it did display in Disk Utility that that there were 2 partitions on the disk. I tried to run Disk Warrior and it showed thousands of errors but still wouldn't mount. At this time the hard drive only show one partition in Disk Utility. Next I tried putting the hard drive in a desktop PC and running Spin Rite - which then gave me several division overflow errors (even with running Spin Rite with a newer version of DOS). The SMART status on the drive reports that the drive has had failures and HD Tune referenced the drive had once hit 59 degrees celsius. Disk Utility gives me the following message when running a pair: Error: Disk Utility can’t repair this disk. Back up as many of your files as possible, reformat the disk, and restore your backed-up files. Overall, the hard drive spins up and sounds OK - there are no clicking noises but the hard drive won't mount and displays as a light gray "Macintosh HD" in disk utility. Any tips or advice on how to recover data on this drive would be GREATLY appreciated! Are there any other tools I can try before calling it quits on this drive? Thank you

    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 | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >