Search Results

Search found 17013 results on 681 pages for 'hard coding'.

Page 31/681 | < Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >

  • 4K sectors: Why are hard drives moving to 4096 byte sectors, vs. 512 byte sectors? Are 4K sectors a

    - by Chris W. Rea
    I've noticed that some Western Digital hard drives are now sporting 4K sectors, that is, the sectors are larger: 4096 bytes vs. the actual de facto standard of 512 bytes. So: What's the big deal with 4K sectors? Is it marketing hype, or a real advantage? Why should somebody building a new PC care, or not, about 4K sectors? Why is this transition taking place now? Why didn't it happen sooner? Are there things to look out for when buying a 4K sector hard drive? e.g. incompatibility? Anything else we should know about 4K sectors?

    Read the article

  • Why does a hard disk suddenly look to Windows as if it "needs to be formatted"?

    - by pufferfish
    This is more of a theory question, but what are the reason(s) for a disk to suddenly cause Windows to start saying it "needs to be formatted"? It happens to an IDE disk that I have in a cheap external enclosure, and I can usually get most of the data back by using software like recuva. It's now happened to an internal disk I have. I'm not looking for software to fix this (although links would be appreciated), but rather a low-level explanation as to what gets corrupted on the disk.

    Read the article

  • What's the best external hard drive configuration for a software developer laptop?

    - by Dan
    I've got a Dell laptop that I use as a software developer box at work and find that the drive is usually the bottleneck. I'd like to hook up two 10k RPM drives that are striped for performance. I've looked for drive cases with RAID but there don't seem to be very many choices and I'm worried about compatibility with the drives (preferably SATA 2). Also I don't have a SATA connection on my machine so it'll have to USB 2.0 for now. Am I headed down the right path or am I missing a much simpler configuration?

    Read the article

  • what is the fastest way to copy all data to a new larger hard drive?

    - by SUPER user
    I was certain this would have been covered before, but I cannot find an answer amongst all the almost-duplicates that come up; sorry if I've missed something obvious. I have a full 320gb disk inside my machine, a new 1tb disk to replace it, and a USB 2.0 chassis. It is only data on a single partition, no OS/apps involved, and the old drive will be kept somewhere as backup (no secure wiping etc). The simple option would be to put new disk in USB chassis, copy files, then swap them over. But for USB pen drives, reading is around 4x faster than writing. If the same is true for a USB SATA chassis (is it?) then it would be significantly faster to swap the drives first and read from the old drive over USB, right? Then the other consideration is that copying lots of files is usually slower than a single file of equivalent size. Is Windows 7 smart enough to do everything in a single lump like that, or is there specialised software that should be used instead? (Even if SATA-SATA copying is faster than involving USB, knowing what to do when it isn't an option is useful information.) Summary: Does a USB SATA chassis suffer from a read/write inequality? (like a USB pen drive does, but unlike a direct SATA connection) Can Windows 7 do sequential access? (I can't find confirmation if Robocopy does this.) Or is it necessary to use a bootable CD/USB with something like Clonezilla to achieve sequential copy speeds?

    Read the article

  • Can a 300W power supply support two additional hard drives?

    - by Josh
    I am thinking of purchasing the Dell I580-5108NBC, but I want to add 2 1TB SATA drives in a RAID5 config. The system only has a 300W power supply, and already has a 1TB drive and a DVD burner. Is the 300W power supply sufficient to support two additional drives, or should I upgrade it? Or, can I simply unplug the DVD burner?

    Read the article

  • Are there any disadvantages of having a "free fall sensor" on a hard disk drive?

    - by therobyouknow
    This is a general question that came out of a specific comparison between the Western Digital Scorpio WD3200BEKT and Western Digital Scorpio WD3200BJKT (which is the same as the former but with a free fall sensor.) Note: I'm not asking for a review or appraisal of these specific drives, as the general question does apply on other brands as well. Though your input would help my decision. To break down the general question in order to answer it, I would be looking for comments on things like: if it's necessary to have differing physical dimensions between free fall sensor drives and those without, e.g. does it make it any thicker, and therefore reduce the systems where it can be installed - particularly smaller laptops? does it actually make the system less reliable - because of false alarms whereby the drive thought the laptop was falling but it wasn't? I suppose that the fact that a manufacturer produces both drives with and without free fall sensors says something about possible disadvantages. Or it could be standard marketing techniques where by making drives with and without results in larger sales volume than just those with the feature alone.

    Read the article

  • Real performance gain from faster IDE or SATA hard drive?

    - by raw_noob
    How much of a real-world performance gain would you expect from: replacing a 5400rpm IDE HD with a 7200rpm IDE HD? replacing a 5400rpm IDE HD with a SATA-150? It's assumed that the drive in question is both the system drive and the only drive. A modest AMD Sempron-based home computer with adequate DDR memory running Windows XP Home SP3. Thanks for looking.

    Read the article

  • Why is writing to my external hard drive slow, while benchmarks show fast writing?

    - by matix2267
    I have an iOmega eGo 320GB portable drive connected through USB2.0 to my laptop running Windows Vista. It's been working fine for quite some time until recently it became very slow when writing e.g. when copying ~300MB movie over to the drive at first it is extremely fast but it actually doesn't write it only puts in cache and then hangs on last 10-20MBs for about a minute. When copying larger files it's the same story: starts fast but then slows down to ~5MB/s (sometimes even slower down to 2MB/s). Strange thing is that I have always had caching disabled for this drive (it was disabled by default and I never bothered changing it). At first I thought that the disk is dying so I checked S.M.A.R.T. values and everything is fine there. I also run chkdsk and it seemed to fix the problem - it worked fast for a few minutes but then it slowed down again. I also tried plugging it into another USB port - no difference. Additionally I noticed that reading under certain circumstances is sometimes slower e.g. loading times for some games are ~10 times longer, whereas simple copying files from this drive to my internal HDD is fast. I ran a speed benchmark using CrystalDiskMark with a 5x100MB run and strangely got these results: read write (MB/s) Seq 33.05 28.25 512k 17.30 15.27 4k 0.267 0.372 4kQD32 0.510 0.260 This is different from what most other people have (I've found many threads about slow disk write while googling but all of them were slow on benchmarks too) which is why I decided to post this problem here. BTW most of the time when writing (or sometimes reading) the activity led is mostly idle (blinks a while and then stops for longer, sometimes has slower blinks ~1 sek, sometimes goes off for a few seconds - extremely long blink :) ) but when benchmarking, defragmenting or just reading (copying from this drive, installing apps from installers there, watching HD videos) it is blinking really fast (like it should) and there are no slowdowns. It shouldn't be driver issue unless stock Windows drivers have some issues I'm not aware of.

    Read the article

  • Web site kills hard disk I/O, how to prevent?

    - by Taras Voynarovsky
    The situation: I have a server, on which we have 2-3 projects. Starting not long ago, the server started hanging up (We could not connect to it by ssh, and the connected clients had to wait 20 minutes for top to give results) Early today I managed to execute gstat while it was in this state and saw, that it stays on 100% on da0, da0s1 and da0s1f. I dont quite know what those ids meen, but I understand that some processes just kill the HD by bombing it down with requests. I ask of some propositions. I dont know how to find the culpit and can't prevent this. I have freebsd on server.

    Read the article

  • Post raid5 setup reboot shows single hard drive failure on ubuntu 12.10?

    - by junkie
    I just set up raid 5 on linux using three HDDs as per a guide. It all went fine until when I rebooted I got the following text: http://i.stack.imgur.com/Zsfjk.jpg. Does this mean one of my HDDs has failed? How do I check if any of them are failing? I tried using smartctl and didn't see any issues. Or is it nothing to do with failure and something else altogether? I would like to get the raid 5 working again but I'm not sure where to go from here. I'm using ubuntu 12.10 and the three raid disks each have a gpt partition with a single full size partition of filesystem type ext4. Note I only got an error on reboot not while I was creating the raid array which went fine. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to do a sector level copy/clone from one hard drive to another?

    - by irrational John
    Without going into distracting details, I'm attempting to duplicate the contents of the 500GB drive in my MacBook to another 500GB drive. But this is turning out to be an unexpected hassle because the drive contains both the OS X partition and an NTFS partition with Win 7 via Apple's Boot Camp. With the exception of Clonezilla, the tools I have looked at so far all have some limitation. The Mac tools don't want to deal with the NTFS partition. The Windows tools are totally clueless about either the HFS+ partition and/or the hybrid MBR/GPT Boot Camp partitioning. Clonezilla looked like it would do what I want but apparently I can't figure out how to use it. After doing what I thought was a sector to sector copy I found that only the NTFS partition had been migrated. The others were apparently empty. (And frankly, I'm not positive Clonezilla migrated the partition table correctly either). Note: It takes over 2 hours using SATA to read/write all sectors with these drives. So I'm not up for using trial & error to narrow in on the right combination of Clonezilla options to use. I'm beginning to think that maybe the answer is to boot Linux (probably Ubuntu) and then use some ancient BSD command. Trouble is I don't know what command (or parameters to use) in order to do a sector level copy from one drive to another. As far as I know the drives have the same number of sectors so this should be trivial. Sigh.

    Read the article

  • Why does a hard disk suddenly look to Windows as if it "needs to be formatted"?

    - by pufferfish
    This is more of a theory question, but what are the reason(s) for a disk to suddenly cause Windows to start saying it "needs to be formatted"? It happens to an IDE disk that I have in a cheap external enclosure, and I can usually get most of the data back by using software like recuva. It's now happened to an internal disk I have. I'm not looking for software to fix this (although links would be appreciated), but rather a low-level explanation as to what gets corrupted on the disk.

    Read the article

  • What's the easiest way to upgrade a single laptop hard drive?

    - by rutherford
    My HD is coming near the end of it's life and I wondered if producing an image of the original was all that was required? What's the best software to use for this and how can I accomplish it - can I use my other laptop for the image file or do I need to buy an external HD to accomplish the clone? Does having several partitions of both FAT32 and NTFS with partition magic installed affect things at all? Is it just a matter of making the image, swapping in the new HD and copying the image to that?

    Read the article

  • Hard drive is working fine then next boot up shows up as a unformatted.

    - by evolvd
    The drive is a Samsung Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB. There are no SMART errors and the drive sounds healthy. Restarted the computer from the drive working fine and then noticed that the drive had the same drive letter but has RAW as the file system. I have a few file/partition recovery software titles available but since doing any scans on this drive takes about 2.5 hours I wanted to know if any one had any advice.

    Read the article

  • Could replacing an old hard drive's circuit board make it work again?

    - by oscilatingcretin
    I have a 12-year-old, 10gb Maxtor drive that died on me around 7 years ago, but I have not had the heart to throw it away. When the computer powers on, it whirrs silently as it tries to spin up and then it stops. So, a few years ago, I sent it off for professional data recovery. They were able to retrieve quite a bit from it, but I know there's a bunch more there. It only cost $700, so I just chalked up the lackluster recovery effort to "you get what you pay for" considering that most companies will charge you several thousands of dollars for this kind of data recovery. When they sent the drive back, I couldn't help but plug it back in just to see if maybe they unjammed something in the process of disassembling/reassembling the drive. To my surprise, the drive had a much healthier spin-up sound and actually stayed spinning for several minutes before winding down to a halt. Windows is even able to detect and interact with the drive, but I get I/O errors after so many minutes of waiting for it to mount. Before I start doing stupid stuff with it like dropping it on the ground, freezing it, crapping on it, etc, I decided to buy the exact same model off Ebay so that I could swap the circuit boards as a last-ditch effort. While it's en route, I thought I'd come here to ask if this is even a worthwhile effort and, if even remotely so, what should I know before ripping off the old board and slapping on the new?

    Read the article

  • How to recover the data from the crashed (external) hard disk drive (NTFS)?

    - by shveerab
    The 300 GB harddisk has 2 partitions,90 GB and 200 GB! I can see the drives in windows(XP) but unable to access them, the file system is shown as RAW, 0 used space and 0 free space!..chkdsk returns the error "unable to determine volume version and date. chkddsk aborted." Is the MBR corrupt? How do I restore it? TestDisk tool isn't recognizing the partitions and says invalid entry for heads/cylinder, 15 and should be 255 and suggests to change it..Should I go ahead and change it? Please advise!

    Read the article

  • What do I need to get so I can upgrade my Thinkpad x61 Tablet hard drive?

    - by user36118
    My Thinkpad X61 Tablet is running out of space, and I would like to give it a bigger drive. I would like to clone the old drive to a bigger new drive. What do I need to get to accomplish this? The fewer things to get, the better, of course. The easier, the better. My system: Thinkpad X61 Tablet. XP w/ the latest SP. I am OK with XP, and don't want to reinstall it. No optical drive. USB 2.0 connectors (Bootable, I think). Things I have: USB 2.0 external drive housing. USB flash stick (2GB).

    Read the article

  • Why does Ubuntu 10.04 not see my hard drives?

    - by CT
    I am trying to install Ubuntu Desktop 10.04 64bit to a new machine. mobo = gigabyte x58a-ud3r cpu = i7 930 ssd = Kingston 64GB V+ hhd = wd 1tb black When the installation gets to the prepare partions step, no partitions are listed. Drives are recognized by BIOS and WinXP setup sees them. I have also tried Ubuntu 9.10. It does not see the drives also. Just searching around I found a suggestion to select "no dmraid" in additional options screen. This did not seem to help. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • 2 identical PCs - can I swap a single hard drive between and expect Windows 7/XP to work?

    - by rgvcorley
    I currently work in 2 different locations, traveling between the 2 every few weeks or so. I currently have screens, kb, mouse etc... in both locations, so I just pick up my tower case when I want to move to the other location. However to make moving easier I was thinking of buying 2 tower cases with hot swappable drive bays on the front and installing identical hardware in each one. This would allow me to pull the drives out and just take them with me and plug them into the PC at the other location. Would windows 7 complain? I'm not fussed about buying licenses for both PCs, but would I have any problems with drivers due to the different serial numbers of the components?

    Read the article

  • 2 identical PCs - can I swap a single hard drive between and expect Windows 7 to work? [closed]

    - by rgvcorley
    I currently work in 2 different locations, traveling between the 2 every few weeks or so. I currently have screens, kb, mouse etc... in both locations, so I just pick up my tower case when I want to move to the other location. However to make moving easier I was thinking of buying 2 tower cases with hot swappable drive bays on the front and installing identical hardware in each one. This would allow me to pull the drives out and just take them with me and plug them into the PC at the other location. Would windows 7 complain? I'm not fussed about buying licenses for both PCs, but would I have any problems with drivers due to the different serial numbers of the components?

    Read the article

  • Does multi-platter hard-drive use all of their heads to read simultaneously?

    - by WiSaGaN
    Suppose we have a harddisk with 2 platters with characteristics below: Rotational rate: 10, 000 RPM Avg sectors/track: 1000 Surfaces: 4 Sector size: 512 bytes I was reading "Computer Systems: A Programmer's Perspective 2ed" when I found that it calculates transfer time as if it only uses ONE head to read a sector. If that's the case, why not use 4 heads to write(read) on 4 surfaces? So when I write a 2K bytes file, each head should only need to wait for the platters to rotate just one sector length instead of 4, thus reducing the transfer time by a factor of 4. Or even redesign sector to make each sector on one cylinder but on 4 tracks residing same position respectively on 4 surfaces. Each one of (512/4) bytes. So when the hd needs to read a sector of 512 bytes, we only need the disk to rotate roughly 1/4 compare to original time. The idea looks like RAID 0.

    Read the article

  • Why might one hard disk perform slower than another?

    - by Styne666
    I have just bought two WD 3TB Reds (WD30EFRX) for a FreeNAS box and whilst doing burn-in testing it seems like one is consistently taking about 10% longer than the other. So far I've done: a dd read test of the whole device, a long SMART test and it's currently halfway through a badblocks -wvs. The second device is lagging behind the first on all of them. I'm running these commands on Debian stable in two Konsole tabs. Is there a reason this could be considered normal behaviour or is it worth running the tests independantly? They're both plugged in to the LSI 2308 (IT mode) on a Supermicro X10SL7-F.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >