Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Peter Larsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Hi,

/* crossposted, "fut" to rec.audio.tech ... */

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error and the datarecovery
software I tried - three different tools - insist that the drive is 128
gb and discard the os supplied geometry.

You might want to rush slowly to that drive size and stay with 120 gb
for easier problem solving if indeed it is a general problem that
recovery software doesn't "do" larger drives .... I am quite happy that
I got the great good idea of making order in the soundfile folder by
copying all incarnations of it to that drive and that the few files I
moved were recoverable via an undelete tool. It had been unpleasant to
learn with unique files on the drive ....

I don't know if it mattered that I had decided on having a fairly small
(8205 megabytes) primary partition and the rest a secondary with a
single logical drive, nor just how the entire secondary partition went
missing, I will try again with just a single partition on the drive to
see whether it is reproduceable, not having multiple parttions on a
drive has previously been suggested as a workaround back when win95 osr
2.1 had "an issue" with large drives that was later solved by a
recommended update.

It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.

Additional information, if anybody has any, on this issue appreciated,
my new backing up to drive seems somewhat less useful than I had hoped.

Note: I didn't say "don't do it" to the drive size, they are currently
the cheapest pr. gigabyte, I just said "beware, short term an issue
seems to exist, long term it will probably be solved".


Kind regards

Peter Larsen


--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************
  #2   Report Post  
Dave Platt
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

In article ,
Peter Larsen wrote:

Hi,

/* crossposted, "fut" to rec.audio.tech ... */

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error and the datarecovery
software I tried - three different tools - insist that the drive is 128
gb and discard the os supplied geometry.


I don't know if it mattered that I had decided on having a fairly small
(8205 megabytes) primary partition and the rest a secondary with a
single logical drive, nor just how the entire secondary partition went
missing, I will try again with just a single partition on the drive to
see whether it is reproduceable, not having multiple parttions on a
drive has previously been suggested as a workaround back when win95 osr
2.1 had "an issue" with large drives that was later solved by a
recommended update.

It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.

Additional information, if anybody has any, on this issue appreciated,
my new backing up to drive seems somewhat less useful than I had hoped.


This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.

The older ATA-5 command set is limited to using logical block
addresses which will fit into 28 bits - large enough for 128 gibibytes
or 137 gigabytes (depending on whether you prefer to count by twos or
tens).

Newer, larger drives support both the ATA-5 command set, and the newer
ATA-6 commands which allow 48-bit logical block addresses. If you
query a drive of this sort using the ATA-5 commands, it'll tell you
that it's only 128 gibibytes, since that's the largest size whose
value fits into the 28 bits available in the response field.

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
  #3   Report Post  
Dave Platt
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

In article ,
Peter Larsen wrote:

Hi,

/* crossposted, "fut" to rec.audio.tech ... */

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error and the datarecovery
software I tried - three different tools - insist that the drive is 128
gb and discard the os supplied geometry.


I don't know if it mattered that I had decided on having a fairly small
(8205 megabytes) primary partition and the rest a secondary with a
single logical drive, nor just how the entire secondary partition went
missing, I will try again with just a single partition on the drive to
see whether it is reproduceable, not having multiple parttions on a
drive has previously been suggested as a workaround back when win95 osr
2.1 had "an issue" with large drives that was later solved by a
recommended update.

It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.

Additional information, if anybody has any, on this issue appreciated,
my new backing up to drive seems somewhat less useful than I had hoped.


This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.

The older ATA-5 command set is limited to using logical block
addresses which will fit into 28 bits - large enough for 128 gibibytes
or 137 gigabytes (depending on whether you prefer to count by twos or
tens).

Newer, larger drives support both the ATA-5 command set, and the newer
ATA-6 commands which allow 48-bit logical block addresses. If you
query a drive of this sort using the ATA-5 commands, it'll tell you
that it's only 128 gibibytes, since that's the largest size whose
value fits into the 28 bits available in the response field.

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
  #4   Report Post  
Dave Platt
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

In article ,
Peter Larsen wrote:

Hi,

/* crossposted, "fut" to rec.audio.tech ... */

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error and the datarecovery
software I tried - three different tools - insist that the drive is 128
gb and discard the os supplied geometry.


I don't know if it mattered that I had decided on having a fairly small
(8205 megabytes) primary partition and the rest a secondary with a
single logical drive, nor just how the entire secondary partition went
missing, I will try again with just a single partition on the drive to
see whether it is reproduceable, not having multiple parttions on a
drive has previously been suggested as a workaround back when win95 osr
2.1 had "an issue" with large drives that was later solved by a
recommended update.

It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.

Additional information, if anybody has any, on this issue appreciated,
my new backing up to drive seems somewhat less useful than I had hoped.


This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.

The older ATA-5 command set is limited to using logical block
addresses which will fit into 28 bits - large enough for 128 gibibytes
or 137 gigabytes (depending on whether you prefer to count by twos or
tens).

Newer, larger drives support both the ATA-5 command set, and the newer
ATA-6 commands which allow 48-bit logical block addresses. If you
query a drive of this sort using the ATA-5 commands, it'll tell you
that it's only 128 gibibytes, since that's the largest size whose
value fits into the 28 bits available in the response field.

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
  #5   Report Post  
Dave Platt
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

In article ,
Peter Larsen wrote:

Hi,

/* crossposted, "fut" to rec.audio.tech ... */

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error and the datarecovery
software I tried - three different tools - insist that the drive is 128
gb and discard the os supplied geometry.


I don't know if it mattered that I had decided on having a fairly small
(8205 megabytes) primary partition and the rest a secondary with a
single logical drive, nor just how the entire secondary partition went
missing, I will try again with just a single partition on the drive to
see whether it is reproduceable, not having multiple parttions on a
drive has previously been suggested as a workaround back when win95 osr
2.1 had "an issue" with large drives that was later solved by a
recommended update.

It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.

Additional information, if anybody has any, on this issue appreciated,
my new backing up to drive seems somewhat less useful than I had hoped.


This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.

The older ATA-5 command set is limited to using logical block
addresses which will fit into 28 bits - large enough for 128 gibibytes
or 137 gigabytes (depending on whether you prefer to count by twos or
tens).

Newer, larger drives support both the ATA-5 command set, and the newer
ATA-6 commands which allow 48-bit logical block addresses. If you
query a drive of this sort using the ATA-5 commands, it'll tell you
that it's only 128 gibibytes, since that's the largest size whose
value fits into the 28 bits available in the response field.

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!


  #6   Report Post  
Peter Larsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Dave Platt wrote:

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error ...


There are a few conditions for the safe use of that drive size - 160 gb
- and if those are not met, then the partition that exceeds it can and
will vanish without warning or error message - other than that it has
gone missing - at the instant of the 28 bit address space being
exceeded. This a brief excerpt of a very fine explanation received from
Western Digital - not their drive, but their software also did not read
its size correctly on the machine in question. The event log error is
strange ... the machine complains about missing member of stripe or
volume set, but when all bets are off, then indeed they *are* off and
anything, it appears, can get logged to explain an unimagined, thus
untrapped error.

This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.


Indeed, it should in my opinion have worked because the drive is on a
highpoint 368 controller that appears to the OS as being scsi, but it
was only to partion magic that the drive looked as it is. Once the
primary partion was removed in diskmanager (nt4) then the drive looks
like 128 gb in it, so it seems that the OS has told the recoverysoftware
tried that "drive claims to be larger, but surely it is nonsense".

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.


At least one of the suppliers of recovery software that I filed
bugreports at say "uhm, we're working on just that right now ... ".
Thank you for pointing me in the right direction Dave. It appears that I
will have to put the drive in a usb-box to have benefit of its full size
for backups, the "iron" of the old machine (p133) I had put it in does
not support current OS versions, usb will probably be at least as fast
anyway.

Microsoft links suggested by western digital a

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098

and

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;303013

It appears that the attractiveness of 160 gb drives using current and/or
moderately aged technology is modest for those that like to be able to
move drive around freely.

Dave Platt AE6EO



Kind regards

Peter Larsen



--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************
  #7   Report Post  
Peter Larsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Dave Platt wrote:

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error ...


There are a few conditions for the safe use of that drive size - 160 gb
- and if those are not met, then the partition that exceeds it can and
will vanish without warning or error message - other than that it has
gone missing - at the instant of the 28 bit address space being
exceeded. This a brief excerpt of a very fine explanation received from
Western Digital - not their drive, but their software also did not read
its size correctly on the machine in question. The event log error is
strange ... the machine complains about missing member of stripe or
volume set, but when all bets are off, then indeed they *are* off and
anything, it appears, can get logged to explain an unimagined, thus
untrapped error.

This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.


Indeed, it should in my opinion have worked because the drive is on a
highpoint 368 controller that appears to the OS as being scsi, but it
was only to partion magic that the drive looked as it is. Once the
primary partion was removed in diskmanager (nt4) then the drive looks
like 128 gb in it, so it seems that the OS has told the recoverysoftware
tried that "drive claims to be larger, but surely it is nonsense".

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.


At least one of the suppliers of recovery software that I filed
bugreports at say "uhm, we're working on just that right now ... ".
Thank you for pointing me in the right direction Dave. It appears that I
will have to put the drive in a usb-box to have benefit of its full size
for backups, the "iron" of the old machine (p133) I had put it in does
not support current OS versions, usb will probably be at least as fast
anyway.

Microsoft links suggested by western digital a

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098

and

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;303013

It appears that the attractiveness of 160 gb drives using current and/or
moderately aged technology is modest for those that like to be able to
move drive around freely.

Dave Platt AE6EO



Kind regards

Peter Larsen



--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************
  #8   Report Post  
Peter Larsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Dave Platt wrote:

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error ...


There are a few conditions for the safe use of that drive size - 160 gb
- and if those are not met, then the partition that exceeds it can and
will vanish without warning or error message - other than that it has
gone missing - at the instant of the 28 bit address space being
exceeded. This a brief excerpt of a very fine explanation received from
Western Digital - not their drive, but their software also did not read
its size correctly on the machine in question. The event log error is
strange ... the machine complains about missing member of stripe or
volume set, but when all bets are off, then indeed they *are* off and
anything, it appears, can get logged to explain an unimagined, thus
untrapped error.

This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.


Indeed, it should in my opinion have worked because the drive is on a
highpoint 368 controller that appears to the OS as being scsi, but it
was only to partion magic that the drive looked as it is. Once the
primary partion was removed in diskmanager (nt4) then the drive looks
like 128 gb in it, so it seems that the OS has told the recoverysoftware
tried that "drive claims to be larger, but surely it is nonsense".

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.


At least one of the suppliers of recovery software that I filed
bugreports at say "uhm, we're working on just that right now ... ".
Thank you for pointing me in the right direction Dave. It appears that I
will have to put the drive in a usb-box to have benefit of its full size
for backups, the "iron" of the old machine (p133) I had put it in does
not support current OS versions, usb will probably be at least as fast
anyway.

Microsoft links suggested by western digital a

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098

and

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;303013

It appears that the attractiveness of 160 gb drives using current and/or
moderately aged technology is modest for those that like to be able to
move drive around freely.

Dave Platt AE6EO



Kind regards

Peter Larsen



--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************
  #9   Report Post  
Peter Larsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Dave Platt wrote:

Please check the applicability of data recovery software with these
drives prior to have to rely on it, I just lost a partion on such a
drive in an unknown and un-understood error ...


There are a few conditions for the safe use of that drive size - 160 gb
- and if those are not met, then the partition that exceeds it can and
will vanish without warning or error message - other than that it has
gone missing - at the instant of the 28 bit address space being
exceeded. This a brief excerpt of a very fine explanation received from
Western Digital - not their drive, but their software also did not read
its size correctly on the machine in question. The event log error is
strange ... the machine complains about missing member of stripe or
volume set, but when all bets are off, then indeed they *are* off and
anything, it appears, can get logged to explain an unimagined, thus
untrapped error.

This is likely a BIOS / device-driver issue.


Indeed, it should in my opinion have worked because the drive is on a
highpoint 368 controller that appears to the OS as being scsi, but it
was only to partion magic that the drive looked as it is. Once the
primary partion was removed in diskmanager (nt4) then the drive looks
like 128 gb in it, so it seems that the OS has told the recoverysoftware
tried that "drive claims to be larger, but surely it is nonsense".

In order to address the additional capacity, all of the software that
you use must be able to use the ATA-6 commands.


At least one of the suppliers of recovery software that I filed
bugreports at say "uhm, we're working on just that right now ... ".
Thank you for pointing me in the right direction Dave. It appears that I
will have to put the drive in a usb-box to have benefit of its full size
for backups, the "iron" of the old machine (p133) I had put it in does
not support current OS versions, usb will probably be at least as fast
anyway.

Microsoft links suggested by western digital a

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098

and

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;303013

It appears that the attractiveness of 160 gb drives using current and/or
moderately aged technology is modest for those that like to be able to
move drive around freely.

Dave Platt AE6EO



Kind regards

Peter Larsen



--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************
  #10   Report Post  
neil davis
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Peter,
It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.


Actually, this depends on the RAID card and your configuration.... Some
RAIDs will simply mark the bad block and copy the parity information to a
good spot or to another drive, since it has another copy on one of the other
drives.

This is the advantage of RAID-5. RAID-0 doesn't do this, striping without
parity offers no redundancy, in fact, every drive you add to a RAID 0
increases your chances for a major catastrophe. Lose one drive, lose the
info on all with 0, unless the 0 is mirrored, aka RAID10 (Raid 1 + 0... 4,
6, 8 ... n drives). It all depends on the card's RAID implementation and
your configuration. 7 drives in a raid-0 means it is 7x more likely one will
fail and take your information with it, so mirroring becomes increasingly
important.

Server quality RAID's are much more robust. If you paid less than $400 USD
or so for a SCSI card(pricewatch price), it probably isn't industrial
quality. The $79 adaptec cards aren't giving you too much. U320 on PCIX is
what you need on your file server, SATA RAID10 on your workstation. Only
problem is with any RAID, it isn't a backup system. RAID10 only protects you
from drive failures, it is not a backup substitute.

Hope this info helps... See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID for more
complete information about RAID. Do not mess with iSCSI unless you have
10Gbps LAN.... i mean it : ) It won't work for any appreciable amount of
audio without this. 1Gbps iSCSI will net you about 117MB's per second. A
local SATA mirror is better.

-neil





  #11   Report Post  
neil davis
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Peter,
It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.


Actually, this depends on the RAID card and your configuration.... Some
RAIDs will simply mark the bad block and copy the parity information to a
good spot or to another drive, since it has another copy on one of the other
drives.

This is the advantage of RAID-5. RAID-0 doesn't do this, striping without
parity offers no redundancy, in fact, every drive you add to a RAID 0
increases your chances for a major catastrophe. Lose one drive, lose the
info on all with 0, unless the 0 is mirrored, aka RAID10 (Raid 1 + 0... 4,
6, 8 ... n drives). It all depends on the card's RAID implementation and
your configuration. 7 drives in a raid-0 means it is 7x more likely one will
fail and take your information with it, so mirroring becomes increasingly
important.

Server quality RAID's are much more robust. If you paid less than $400 USD
or so for a SCSI card(pricewatch price), it probably isn't industrial
quality. The $79 adaptec cards aren't giving you too much. U320 on PCIX is
what you need on your file server, SATA RAID10 on your workstation. Only
problem is with any RAID, it isn't a backup system. RAID10 only protects you
from drive failures, it is not a backup substitute.

Hope this info helps... See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID for more
complete information about RAID. Do not mess with iSCSI unless you have
10Gbps LAN.... i mean it : ) It won't work for any appreciable amount of
audio without this. 1Gbps iSCSI will net you about 117MB's per second. A
local SATA mirror is better.

-neil



  #12   Report Post  
neil davis
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Peter,
It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.


Actually, this depends on the RAID card and your configuration.... Some
RAIDs will simply mark the bad block and copy the parity information to a
good spot or to another drive, since it has another copy on one of the other
drives.

This is the advantage of RAID-5. RAID-0 doesn't do this, striping without
parity offers no redundancy, in fact, every drive you add to a RAID 0
increases your chances for a major catastrophe. Lose one drive, lose the
info on all with 0, unless the 0 is mirrored, aka RAID10 (Raid 1 + 0... 4,
6, 8 ... n drives). It all depends on the card's RAID implementation and
your configuration. 7 drives in a raid-0 means it is 7x more likely one will
fail and take your information with it, so mirroring becomes increasingly
important.

Server quality RAID's are much more robust. If you paid less than $400 USD
or so for a SCSI card(pricewatch price), it probably isn't industrial
quality. The $79 adaptec cards aren't giving you too much. U320 on PCIX is
what you need on your file server, SATA RAID10 on your workstation. Only
problem is with any RAID, it isn't a backup system. RAID10 only protects you
from drive failures, it is not a backup substitute.

Hope this info helps... See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID for more
complete information about RAID. Do not mess with iSCSI unless you have
10Gbps LAN.... i mean it : ) It won't work for any appreciable amount of
audio without this. 1Gbps iSCSI will net you about 117MB's per second. A
local SATA mirror is better.

-neil



  #13   Report Post  
neil davis
 
Posts: n/a
Default 160 gb drives & data recovery software, beware!

Peter,
It is worthwhile mentioning that RAID'ing does not safeguard against
such logical errors.


Actually, this depends on the RAID card and your configuration.... Some
RAIDs will simply mark the bad block and copy the parity information to a
good spot or to another drive, since it has another copy on one of the other
drives.

This is the advantage of RAID-5. RAID-0 doesn't do this, striping without
parity offers no redundancy, in fact, every drive you add to a RAID 0
increases your chances for a major catastrophe. Lose one drive, lose the
info on all with 0, unless the 0 is mirrored, aka RAID10 (Raid 1 + 0... 4,
6, 8 ... n drives). It all depends on the card's RAID implementation and
your configuration. 7 drives in a raid-0 means it is 7x more likely one will
fail and take your information with it, so mirroring becomes increasingly
important.

Server quality RAID's are much more robust. If you paid less than $400 USD
or so for a SCSI card(pricewatch price), it probably isn't industrial
quality. The $79 adaptec cards aren't giving you too much. U320 on PCIX is
what you need on your file server, SATA RAID10 on your workstation. Only
problem is with any RAID, it isn't a backup system. RAID10 only protects you
from drive failures, it is not a backup substitute.

Hope this info helps... See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID for more
complete information about RAID. Do not mess with iSCSI unless you have
10Gbps LAN.... i mean it : ) It won't work for any appreciable amount of
audio without this. 1Gbps iSCSI will net you about 117MB's per second. A
local SATA mirror is better.

-neil



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Richman's ethical lapses Michael McKelvy Audio Opinions 9 December 12th 03 09:16 AM
DAW & Windows XP RAID Tips, ProTools error -9086 Giganews Pro Audio 0 October 24th 03 06:45 AM
Where are those Wascally Weapons of Mass Destwuction??? Jacob Kramer Audio Opinions 1094 September 9th 03 02:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"