Search Results

Search found 13047 results on 522 pages for 'np hard'.

Page 66/522 | < Previous Page | 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Is there a clean way to tell Windows to release a volume?

    - by zneak
    Hey guys, I'm trying, under Windows 7, to run a virtual machine with VMWare Player from an OS installed on a physical partition. However, when I boot the virtual machine, VMWare Player says that it couldn't access the physical drive and has to abort there. This seems to be a generally acknowledged problem in the VMWare community, as Windows Vista introduced a compelling new security feature that makes it impossible to write to a raw drive without obtaining exclusive access to it. I have googled the issue and found a few workarounds. However, the clean ones seem to only work on whole physical disks, and not on partitions. So I would be left with the dirty solution. In short, it meddles with the MBR to erase any trace of the partitions to use, makes Windows forget about them, then restores the MBR so we can launch the VM. Is there a way to let VMWare acquire exclusive access to the partition without requiring me to nuke it away?

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu on an XPS 14 Ultrabook with mSATA cache and 500GB HD - how to partition for dual boot?

    - by JDS
    I am getting an XPS 14 ( http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-14-l421x/pd ) and I want to dual-boot Windows and Ubuntu. This thing has a 500GB standard HD and a 32GB mSATA that can be used as cache. Does anyone know how this thing is partitioned? Is the OS installed on the mSATA drive and data is on the big HD? Is there a BIOS controller or maybe even a Windows driver that makes the mSATA drive and 500GB HD appear contiguous? I get the impression that something makes the mSATA be used invisibly as cache, but I can't find any technical documentation how that works. My primary concern here is wrt dual-booting Ubuntu. I want to know if I need to partition the mSATA separately, or the big HD, or just partition the "magic" contiguous disk space that appears available to the OS.

    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

  • Where do vendors publish internal transfer rates of HDDs?

    - by red888
    So I've started to dig into storage fundamentals and found that in order to calculate the IOPS of a HDD you need to know the internal transfer rate of the drive (time it takes data to move from the platters to internal disk's cache). I went on newegg and even a few vendor sites and could not find this info published for any HDDs. Is it sometimes called something else? Take this link to a seagate HDD for instance. Nowhere do I see "internal transfer rate", but I do see something called "Sustained Data Rate OD"- is that the same thing? Just so you know where I'm getting this info (Book: "Information Storage and Management Storing, Managing..."): Consider an example with the following specifications provided for a disk: The average seek time is 5 ms in a random I/O environment; therefore, T = 5 ms. Disk rotation speed of 15,000 revolutions per minute or 250 revolutions per second — from which rotational latency (L) can be determined, which is one-half of the time taken for a full rotation or L = (0.5/250 rps expressed in ms). 40 MB/s internal data transfer rate, from which the internal transfer time (X) is derived based on the block size of the I/O — for example, an I/O with a block size of 32 KB; therefore X = 32 KB/40 MB. Consequently, the time taken by the I/O controller to serve an I/O of block size 32 KB is (TS) = 5 ms + (0.5/250) + 32 KB/40 MB = 7.8 ms. Therefore, the maximum number of I/Os serviced per second or IOPS is (1/TS) = 1/(7.8 × 10^-3) = 128 IOPS.

    Read the article

  • Forcing programs to be installed to another drive

    - by zyboxenterprises
    I have an SSD as my main Windows drive, with a 640GB 2.5" HDD, partitioned to store programs and user settings, and also to act as backup (it's the only thing I had lying around at the time of building my PC). The task was to make the PC as fast as possible, while having an increased storage capacity available to store normal user data, and to assist in my small data recovery business. The problem is that whenever I install a program, it installs to C:\Program Files [(x86 for the 32 bit programs]\, although I have changed the environment variables. This wouldn't normally be an issue, however every installation program points its shortcut to my 640GB HDD. The root layout of both drives: To clarify: Program files get installed to C:\ Program shortcuts are always pointed to Z:\, my 640GB HDD Modifying the relevant environment variables doesn't do anything, I looked at this, but however it only talks about modifying the registry and environment variables, which I have already done so. I install to the Z:\ drive if the installation program lets me change the installation path, but however the installation programs sometimes don't let me change this. Is there a way that I can force every program to install to the relevant location on Z:\? Perhaps I'm missing something here? Edit: Found this program; would it be appropriate to use in my case? I would be able to move the entire Program Files (and its x86 version) to Z:\, without impacting on the performance.

    Read the article

  • How do I restore a partition without losing the data?

    - by sama
    I lost the D-partition in My Computer I opened My Computer, but couldn't find it and I don't know where it is or how to return it. I went to Disk Management and found it available as free space. So I tried to make it NTFS, but I had to format the drive and I don't want to, since it will erase my data. Does anyone know how I can restore my partition without losing my data?

    Read the article

  • Is SATA bandwith per Port or per Controller?

    - by instanceofTom
    I always assumed that it was per Controller channel, and that If I have 4xSATA 3.0Gb/s ports on my Motherboard then I should have a potential 12.0Gb/s of bandwith. However, after doing some searching I found conflicting information suggesting that if I had 4xSATA drives connected to my MB and were using them simultaneously each drive would get only 3.0Gb/s /4 = 768 Mb/s max bandwith. So I wanted to clear up my understanding. Side question: Are there other hdd/ssd bandwith bottlenecks to be aware of? (Links to already answered questions are more than welcome)

    Read the article

  • IDE Motherboard to Boot from a SATA 1T Hdd

    - by JavaMan
    I want to use my SATA HDD in my very old ASUS A7V8X-X motherboard (made in 2003). I intended to buy a cheap adapter for this. Say something similar to this one: http://www.cooldrives.com/satoidecofor.html But would there be any issue if I want to boot from this SATA drive? My impression is that these kind of adapters convert SATA signal and commands to PATA directly and such a low level conversion should be transparent to the motherboard and BIOS - in case the BIOS doesn't support SATA. And, for my motherboard, it sure doesn't. Does anyone ever used such a kind of adapter to support a boot drive? Any success sorry?

    Read the article

  • why does the partition start on sector 2048 instead of 63

    - by gcb
    I had two drives partitioned the same and running 2 raid partitions on each. One died and I replaced it under warranty for the same model. While trying to partition it, the first partition can only start on sector 2048, instead of 63 that was before. Driver have different geometry as previous and remaining ones. (Fewer heads/more cylinders) old drive: $ sudo fdisk -c -u -l /dev/sdb Disk /dev/sdb: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders, total 3907029168 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: 0x000aa189 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 63 174080339 87040138+ 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 174080340 182482334 4200997+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sdb3 182482335 3907024064 1862270865 fd Linux raid autodetect remanufactured drive received from warranty: $ sudo fdisk -c -u -l /dev/sda Disk /dev/sda: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 81 heads, 63 sectors/track, 765633 cylinders, total 3907029168 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: 0x000d0b5d Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 2048 ... why is that?

    Read the article

  • Dell Inspiron 1525 - internal hard drive not detected

    - by GingerT
    Others have asked about this issue but had intermittent access to their HD, therefore their results did not apply to this situation. I have tried reseating the HD to no effect. I also tried booting from the Internal HD to no effect. Next step get a connector cable and move the data to a different HD, or send in for HD recovery? Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Completely replacing (upgrading) a RAID 5 array of disks on an ESXi server

    - by jshin47
    I have a development server that runs several VM on ESXi 5. It has an array of disks in the RAID 5 configuration where all of the disks are currently the same size. I would like to expand storage on this box greatly, but I am not sure what the smartest way to go about this would be. My current plan is to: Turn off all VM Copy VM folders from server to another location Verify that I can mount all the VM on the new location (ie that the copy went ok) Replace all the disks with new, bigger ones Reinstall ESXi5 Copy the VM back over This seems like it might take a while to accomplish and is not terribly slick, especially since I will have to reconfigure ESXi 5, but is there a smarter alternative?

    Read the article

  • DDRescue on Windows or another options like DDRescue for Windows

    - by Frank Thornton
    I have a drive with failed sectors ect... I can't image it with Acronis as it hangs. I can't with Knoppiz it hangs. CHKDSK hangs. I want to use DDRescure but I don't have any Linux boxes running at the moment. I could do is in a VM but that seems like it would be slow and problematic? Are there any ways I can data recovery this disk from my Windows machine or is there an ideal way to work with DDRescue on Windows?

    Read the article

  • Start a ZFS RAIDZ zpool with two discs then add a third?

    - by Doug S.
    Let's say I have two 2TB HDDs and I want to start my first ZFS zpool. Is it possible to create a RAIDZ with just those two discs, giving me 2TB of usable storage (if I understand it right) and then later add another 2TB HDD bringing the total to 4TB of usable storage. Am I correct or does there need to be three HDDs to start with? The reason I ask is I already have one 2TB drive I'm using that's full of files. I want to transition to a zpool but I'd rather only buy two more 2TB drives if I can. From what I understand, RAIDZ behaves similarly to RAID5 (with some major differences, I know, but in terms of capacity). However, RAID5 requires 3+ drives. I was wondering if RAIDZ has the same requirement. If I have to, I can buy the three drives and just start there, later adding the fourth, but if I could start with two and move to three that would save me $80.

    Read the article

  • Recover hard disk from Raw format

    - by user1632736
    I have been all over the web today with no results. So my drive was encrypted (truecrypt) the whole drive where windows resided. I decided to partition it to install W8 and forgot it was encrypted. So the drive got damaged and not accessible. When connected to a computer it asks for formatting. Somehow I enabled the drive through TrueCrypt on another computer and I could see and get all the files. Then I decided to decrypt the drive thinking that everything would be back to normal. After decryption my drive is not NTFS it is in RAW format. I am trying every possible way to recover, and I am desperate enough to ask lol. I tried: ddrescue (linux) (not mountable, no signature, ntfsfix no good) testdisk (linux and windows) Sees the partitions but cant do anything Many recovery applications. etc etc. I read in different places that doing a quickformat to NTFS and then doing a data recovery might help. I would definitely like a second opinion. Any suggestion would be really helpful

    Read the article

  • Resizing partition in Windows 7: how long does it take?

    - by PaulJ
    Okay, maybe this is me worrying about nothing, but... I have a 500 Gb. external drive where I want to create a second partition. I plug it into my Windows 7 box, use Disk Manager and pick the "Shrink Volume" option. It says that the maximum amount to shrink is around 150 Gb. I hit "OK" and it starts working... and it's been going on for about half an hour. The light of the external HD is constantly working. Disk Manager is greyed out and has the "does not respond" message on the top bar; basically, it's behaving as a non-responding application. Is this normal for a drive of this size, or did the application hang? How long would it typically take for a drive like this to resize its partition?

    Read the article

  • How to use File History with Recovery partition?

    - by Karl
    I formatted the recovery partition right after installing Windows 8. I'm curious as to why File history only allow the use of external HDD. Instead of using the Recovery Partition. I can't find a way to use it. I decided to use it exclusively for Restore Points. Is there any way to make the Recovery Partition exclusively for the use of File History? Or should I use 3rd Party programs instead, (Easeus Todo Backup, Macrium Reflect, etc)?

    Read the article

  • Using Ubuntu switch a failing windows 7 harddrive?

    - by firefusion
    My laptop harddrive has developed some serious read errors in the windows partition. Windows 7 still boots but every single action takes an aeon, and it is definitely due to a harddisk error not due to any spyware. I'm using the Ubuntu partition now. I've ordered a new harddrive but my laptop didn't come with a Windows 7 install disk (I think I was meant to make one with the windows 7 tools). So how can I install Windows 7 on my new harddrive?

    Read the article

  • How SSD hard drive affected speed of your website (asp.net/linq/ms sql database)

    - by Sergey Osypchuk
    I have a small database (<1G) But we have a lot of complex logi? in website and client complains on render time, which is 3-5 seconds. We are not google, and thousands of users a day is our dream, so size is not a problem, but speed is important. Can anybody share with experience with SSD drives for ASP.NET (MVC)/LINQ/MS SQL based application ? How you performance increased? UPDATE: this whitepaper states that it will be 20 times faster. http://www.texmemsys.com/files/f000174.pdf

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73  | Next Page >