Search Results

Search found 8914 results on 357 pages for 'disk defragmentation'.

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 6/357 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Truecrypt or default Disk Utility on Mac?

    - by Kaushik Gopal
    Windows by default doesn't come with a password protect folder option (other that Win7 ultimate), so I used to swear by Truecrypt which was great. But I've read in a couple of places that Mac OS X by default has a way of protecting folders using the Default Disk Utility. So my question is which is better, using TrueCrypt on the Mac or just sticking with the default Disk Utils app? Can somebody let me know the advantages of one over the other? A summary from the very helpful answers below: if you're looking for cross-platform usage Truecrypt is the obvious tool of choice if you're looking for convenience, and intend to stick only to the Mac platform, use the default Disk Utils app.

    Read the article

  • Program complains not enough disk space even if the disk space exists

    - by user1189899
    I have an EXT3 partition mounted in ordered data mode. If a power failure occurs when a program is creating files on that partition, I see that space usage reported is normal and I don't see any partial written files. But when I try to run the same program again after the system comes back up it complains that there is not enough disk space. Even though the free space reported is far more than required. The program always succeeds in normal conditions. Also the problem seems to disappear when the partition is remounted. I was wondering what could be the right way to handle the situation other than unmounting and remounting.

    Read the article

  • Don't Cut Corners on Server Defragmentation

    Hard-Core Hardware: Fragmentation may not cut it as a big screen villain, but it remains a threat and handicap to optimal server performance. In this era of massive hard drives and virtualization, minimizing fragmentation is more critical than ever.

    Read the article

  • Don't Cut Corners on Server Defragmentation

    Hard-Core Hardware: Fragmentation may not cut it as a big screen villain, but it remains a threat and handicap to optimal server performance. In this era of massive hard drives and virtualization, minimizing fragmentation is more critical than ever.

    Read the article

  • Disk Response Time in Windows 7 Resource Monitor?

    - by Keith Nicholas
    In the resource monitor I'am looking at the disk response time. There are a lot of processes where the response time is thousands of milliseconds consistently, I'm pretty sure this is the source of my computer slowing down. I'm not sure what normal response times are though? I'm running win 7 64bit ultimate. This is running on a new computer, i5 with a terabyte drive, 4gigs of ram, etc, disk is still pretty much empty, so it should all be pretty snappy. And if it is going really slow, how do I track down whats causing it? I've turned off things like real time virus protection as experiments to see if there is something weird there, but makes no real difference (other than it doesn't contribute to the problem by accessing the disk)

    Read the article

  • Scan disk runs on every boot with Windows XP

    - by Sarfraz Ahmed
    I have four drives on my computer. The problem is that each time I start the computer the scan disk check (CHKDSK) runs for a drive even if I shut down my computer properly. I ran the thorough scan disk check but still for that drive, the scan disk check is always performed no matter what. I wonder what is wrong although everything is fine and accessible along with drive data. Could you guys please help me out of this? I am using Windows XP SP2. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • FTP Reporting Disk Quota Exceeded

    - by Austin
    I am using Notepad++ with FTP_Synchronize to upload files to a server, however, it appears that it is not allowing my file to upload because apparently the "Disk Quota Exceeded" 11:18:49 > -> TYPE I 11:18:49 > Response (200): Type set to I 11:18:49 > -> PASV 11:18:49 > Response (227): Entering Passive Mode (*,*,*,*,*,*). 11:18:50 > -> STOR /home/*/../../var/www/html/test.html 11:18:50 > Response (150): Opening BINARY mode data connection for /home/*/../../var/www/html/test.html 11:18:50 > Response (552): Transfer aborted. Disk quota exceeded Now it may appear that yeah my Disk quota is exceeded, however I've gone to the back-end and saw: Total Used Bandwidth 107.055 MB Allowed Quota 3,000.0 MB Note: Stars were put in place for irrelevant data.

    Read the article

  • How to clone a VirtualBox Disk

    - by [email protected]
     How to clone a VirtualBox DiskCopying the image of Virtual Disk (.vdi file) is a convenient way to duplicate the disk, in cases you want to avoid re-installing an operating system from scratch. However, simply copying the .vdi file into another location will make a verbatim copy of the virtual disk, including the UUID of the disk. If you try to add the copy in the Virtual Media Manager, you will get an error like this:In this case, you have to do is to clone the vdi disk: cd C:\Program Files\Sun\VirtualBox\C:\Program Files\Sun\VirtualBox>vboxmanage clonevdi G:\VMWARES\Database\11GR2onOEL5forVbox\11GR2_OEL5_32GB.vdi G:\VMWARES\Database\11GR2onOEL5forVbox\OEL5_32GB.vdi$ VBoxManage clonevdi Master.vdi Clone.vdiIn case you receive a error like this. It means that the disk is already a copy of other VirtualBox Disk.In that case you chould change the UUID before to clone the Disk.Follow the steps given here in order to do that.

    Read the article

  • Disk image of a Windows 2000 NTFS hard drive

    - by Federico
    Hi, I need to create a disk image from a Windows 2000, NTFS formatted, hard drive. This image has to be used to create backup hard drives to replace the original disk in case an emergency situation arises. This is a medical equipment, so I cannot physically disconnect the disk because I would violate the warranty of the equipment. This machine has a DVD R/W, ethernet and USB 2.0 access, and we have the rights to install any application I want in the Windows 2000 system. 1) Is there any way to do this without installing any new software in the Windows 2000 system, so it is the least invasive as possible? 2) If we have to install a software to do the backup, which software do you recommend? Any hint will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Federico

    Read the article

  • Why isn't Startup Disk Creator working in 12.04?

    - by Steve Kelem
    I'm trying to create a bootable USB stick (7.5G) for Ubuntu 12.04 (x86_64) from another Ubuntu 12.04 x86_64 PC. I downloaded the Ubuntu 12.04 LTS "Precise Pangolin" - Release amd64 (20120425). When I run Make Startup Disk, I selected the downloaded release. The drive shows up with a capacity of 7.5GB and a blank space under "Free Space". I have tried using the "Erase Disk" button, which seems to erase the disk. The problem is that the options below the "Disk to use" section are grayed out. The "Make Startup Disk" is colored dull orange, while the source disc image and device to use are bright orange. The "Make Startup Disk" button doesn't do anything when I click it. The only working buttons are "Other...", "Erase Disk", and "Close". Upon using Other button to select the ISO, it allows to select the ISO but it doesn't load and the "Source Disk Image" field remains empty.

    Read the article

  • Virtual Machine files on ramdisk doesn't run faster than on physical disk

    - by Landy
    I installed total 36G memory (4x8G + 2x2G) in the host (Windows 7) and I used ImDisk to create a 32G ramdisk and format it to NTFS file system. Then I copied the virtual machine (in VMware Workstation format) folder, including vmx, vmdk, etc... to the new created ram disk. Then I tried to power on it in VMware Workstation. What made me surprised is that the performance is not better than before. It cost almost the same time to power on the Windows 7 VM. I check the Resource Monitor in the Windows 7 host, and the statistics of CPU, disk, network are rather normal. The memory has reported 3000+ hard fault/sec when guest OS boot then drop to 0 after the guest powered on. Any idea about this issue? I had thought the performance of ramdisk will be better than physical disk in this case. Am I wrong? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic Disk: Revert back to basic or...?

    - by someguy
    When I was trying to create a new partition (via Disk Management) it warned me that the disk would be dynamic, but I thought it meant the partition and went ahead. Now, my hard disk, which has the main C partition, is dynamic. I haven't shut down the computer, and I'm not sure what the consequences are. Should I revert back to basic or...? What ever happens, I don't want to lose my data. Edit: I think I should mention that I don't know how to revert back to basic...

    Read the article

  • Hard Drive Fundamentals And Verifying Disk Performance

    - by Agnel Kurian
    Over the past few months, my Windows XP machine has slowed down to a crawl. It takes about 10-15 minutes to go from power-up to reaching a responsive state. I have reasons to believe that this is a result of the hard disk slowing down. Questions: Do hard disks slow down as a result of mechanical wear and tear ...or age? How do I check if my disk has slowed down? Conversely, how can I verify that my disk is indeed running at the speed it's designed to run at? Could drivers be at fault here? Do hard disks come with drivers or does Windows use a generic driver?

    Read the article

  • Missing disk space in Windows XP

    - by Jørn Schou-Rode
    On my mother's Lenovo laptop, Windows XP claims that the hard drive is almost full. According to the properties window, 52.7 out of 55.2 GB is in use: By deleting temp files from Internet Explorer, System Restore, Recycle bin, Windows Update, System Cleanup, I managed to free up about one GB. That's still 50 GB in use, which still is a lot more than I expected. Hence, I gave good old WinDirStat a spin, and here's the output: It might be hard to read here, but the first line says that the total amount of disk space in use on drive C is 24.3 GB. So Windows claims usage of 52.7 GB and WinDirStat can only account for 24.3 GB. Where is the other half of that disk space being used? I hope someone has an answer, or some tricks or tips to do further research. UPDATE: The laptop in question has an SSD hard drive. I am aware that these disk (at least the earlier ones) have a limited life-time. Could the symptoms described be caused by wear and tear on the SSD?

    Read the article

  • Solaris kstat sdX disk nread counter value decreasing

    - by mykhal
    I get strange disk io nread (bytes read) counter values (from kstat) on Solaris. Example of collected nread value for sd6 disk collected in 30s interval (command kstat -n sd6): 768579416 768579416 768579416 768579416 768579416 768579416 768579416 768496080 768496080 768496080 768496080 768496080 768496080 768496080 768496080 768530896 768530896 768447560 768447560 768447560 One would suppose that the relative read bytes count can't be negative.. I wonder what can couse this situation and whether there is more reliable disk io data available. Some info about the system: machine:~ # uname -a SunOS machine 5.10 Generic_127112-11 i86pc i386 i86pc machine:~ # cat /etc/release Solaris 10 11/06 s10x_u3wos_10 X86 Copyright 2006 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Use is subject to license terms. Assembled 14 November 2006

    Read the article

  • Disk performance below expectations

    - by paulH
    this is a follow-up to a previous question that I asked (Two servers with inconsistent disk speed). I have a PowerEdge R510 server with a PERC H700 integrated RAID controller (call this Server B) that was built using eight disks with 3Gb/s bandwidth that I was comparing with an almost identical server (call this Server A) that was built using four disks with 6Gb/s bandwidth. Server A had much better I/O rates than Server B. Once I discovered the difference with the disks, I had Server A rebuilt with faster 6Gbps disks. Unfortunately this resulted in no increase in the performance of the disks. Expecting that there must be some other configuration difference between the servers, we took the 6Gbps disks out of Server A and put them in Server B. This also resulted in no increase in the performance of the disks. We now have two identical servers built, with the exception that one is built with six 6Gbps disks and the other with eight 3Gbps disks, and the I/O rates of the disks is pretty much identical. This suggests that there is some bottleneck other than the disks, but I cannot understand how Server B originally had better I/O that has subsequently been 'lost'. Comparative I/O information below, as measured by SQLIO. The same parameters were used for each test. It's not the actual numbers that are significant but rather the variations between systems. In each case D: is a 2 disk RAID 1 volume, and E: is a 4 disk RAID 10 volume (apart from the original Server A, where E: was a 2 disk RAID 0 volume). Server A (original setup with 6Gpbs disks) D: Read (MB/s) 63 MB/s D: Write (MB/s) 170 MB/s E: Read (MB/s) 68 MB/s E: Write (MB/s) 320 MB/s Server B (original setup with 3Gpbs disks) D: Read (MB/s) 52 MB/s D: Write (MB/s) 88 MB/s E: Read (MB/s) 112 MB/s E: Write (MB/s) 130 MB/s Server A (new setup with 3Gpbs disks) D: Read (MB/s) 55 MB/s D: Write (MB/s) 85 MB/s E: Read (MB/s) 67 MB/s E: Write (MB/s) 180 MB/s Server B (new setup with 6Gpbs disks) D: Read (MB/s) 61 MB/s D: Write (MB/s) 95 MB/s E: Read (MB/s) 69 MB/s E: Write (MB/s) 180 MB/s Can anybody suggest any ideas what is going on here? The drives in use are as follows: Dell Seagate F617N ST3300657SS 300GB 15K RPM SAS Dell Hitachi HUS156030VLS600 300GB 3.5 inch 15000rpm 6GB SAS Hitachi Hus153030vls300 300GB Server SAS Dell ST3146855SS Seagate 3.5 inch 146GB 15K SAS

    Read the article

  • Store Varnish cache in hard disk

    - by Great Kuma
    Hello, The situation is: Im building PHP application, and need http caching. Varnish is great, and lots of people tell me that Varnish store the cached data in RAM. But I want it cached in hard disk. Is there any way to store the Varnish cached data in hard disk? thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why is the disk making my motherboard beep?

    - by Mark Ransom
    Whenever I let my PC do heavy disk accesses for a long time, the speaker on the motherboard starts making a continuous chirping sound. Thankfully it doesn't happen often, but it drives me nuts when it does. Anybody know where this sound might be coming from, or have any hints as to how to track it down? Edit: The problem appears to be with the processor, the correlation with disk access was coincidental. Thanks for all the answers.

    Read the article

  • Clean install vs disk image

    - by Thanos
    Once a year I am making a clean install on windows, in order to keep my system fast. After posting a question on making a bootable windows usb with exe programs where I was adviced to make a disk image, a new question rose. What is the difference in making a disk image and performing a clean install on windows? Which is better in terms of speed, general performance, value for time and transfering between different computers?

    Read the article

  • How do I Change a damaged Disk in a Raid 5 array

    - by Egakagoc2xI
    Hi, I have a server with a 4-drives Raid 5 array; one of the disks is damaged. All the disks are hot pluggable. My Question is, I want to replace the damaged disk with a new one, do I have to shutdown the server or should I just change the hard disk with the server on and it will rebuild the array? There is a procedure to follow? My Server is a HP. Regards.

    Read the article

  • Bad disk performance on HP DL360 with Smarty Array P400i RAID controller

    - by sarge
    I have a HP DL360 server with 4x 146GB SAS disks and a Smart Array P400i RAID controller with 256MB cache. The disks are in RAID 5 (3 disks + 1 hot spare). The server is running VMware ESX 3i. The disk write performance is really bad. Here are some numbers: ns1:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 3364 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1685.69 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 18 MB in 3.79 seconds = 4.75 MB/sec ns1:~# time sh -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=ddfile bs=8k count=125000 && sync" 125000+0 records in 125000+0 records out 1024000000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 282.307 s, 3.6 MB/s real 4m52.003s user 0m2.160s sys 3m10.796s Compared to another server those number are terrible: Dell R200, 2x 500GB SATA disks, PERC raid controller (disks are mirrored). web4:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 6584 MB in 2.00 seconds = 3297.79 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 316 MB in 3.02 seconds = 104.79 MB/sec web4:~# time sh -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=ddfile bs=8k count=125000 && sync" 125000+0 records in 125000+0 records out 1024000000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 35.2919 s, 29.0 MB/s real 0m36.570s user 0m0.476s sys 0m32.298s The server isn't very loaded and the VMware Infrastructure Client performance monitor is showing 550KBps average read and 1208KBps average write for the last 30 minutes (highest write rate: 6.6MBps). This has been a problem from the start. Any ideas?

    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 | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >