hutch
December 7th 03, 09:39 PM
not fr ms - tho this will get you started - ie
1/
ms warns you of possible inconsistencies in
'converting to ntfs' - ie
Convert
....
Remarks
....
The location of the MFT is different on volumes that have
been converted from previous version of NTFS, so volume
performance might not be as good on volumes converted
from Windows NT.
Volumes converted from FAT to NTFS lack some performance
benefits compared to volumes initially formatted with
NTFS. On converted volumes, the MFT might become
fragmented. In addition, on converted boot volumes, NTFS
permissions are not applied after the volume is
converted.
2/
scandisk - no longer supported/avail in win xp
chkdsk.exe/checkdisk/ - now used in win xp - as it was
orig used in win ver 2-6+
note
avail in 'gui or command prompt/command line'
3/
win xp - does not normally start 'checkdisk' at
'start up' - tho it does on 'certain prob conditions'
or give you the option to run/esp when you have
'ntfs - req disk to be locked/ie before win xp runs'
4/
chk w/seagate on 'operating conditions' of their
'diskwizard 2003 under win xp os' for details/info
5/
'checkdisk' - can be run repeatedly til it has
cleaned up 'disk errors/flaws'
6/
if you haven't already done so - you might consider
'splitting up your pagefile' - and/or having a
'pagefile for ea hd'
ie
How to Configure Paging Files for Optimization and
Recovery in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/search/preview.aspx?
scid=kb;en-us;Q314482
and
take it fr there
hth
God Bless
hutch
>-----Original Message-----
> A few weeks earlier, I installed a new seagate hard
>drive on my pc and I transferred my my OS files on the
>new hard disk/partition using Seagate Diskwizard 2003.
>Everything was successfully done and the new drive
>successully booted into the OS. Another change that I
did
>was that I changed my file system to NTFS. Now I am
>experiencing a changed behaviour on my system.
>(1) Previously, whenever my computer had shut down
>improperly (because of a power failure), scandisk used
to
>automatically scan for any changes. Since the above
>upgradation/changed file system/new hard drive, I have
>never seen scandisk appearing automatically. My question
>is; Is it normal behaviour? or something is wrong with
my
>pc. Is it normal for my pc not to start automatic
>scandisk after an improper shut down under NTFS.
>(2) After this new situation, whenever, my pc shuts
>down improperly, I manually prefer a complete scan using
>the properties of my OS partition (C drive in my case)
>and accepting a scan at the next startup (as it prompts
>me so). The problem here is that after every scan, a
>report named 'bootex' is generated and almost everytime
I
>find some minor inconsistencies on my drive. They,
>however, do not appear again after a consecutive 2 or
>three complete scans. As a guide, I am posting the
report
>(bootex)generated by windows in double quotes:
>
>""Checking file system on C:
>The type of the file system is NTFS.
>Volume label is USMAN.
>
>A disk check has been scheduled.
>Windows will now check the disk.
>Cleaning up minor inconsistencies on the drive.
>Cleaning up 4 unused index entries from index $SII of
>file 0x9.
>Cleaning up 4 unused index entries from index $SDH of
>file 0x9.
>Cleaning up 4 unused security descriptors.
>CHKDSK is verifying file data (stage 4 of 5)...
>File data verification completed.
>CHKDSK is verifying free space (stage 5 of 5)...
>Free space verification is complete.
>
..............note - clipped here........................
>
>
>My question here is that Is it a cause of concern for me
>to have unused index entries (sometimes there are 2 or 4
>or 6 or 8 unused index entries). And as I said earlier,
>it takes me 2 or 3 scans to have a report devoid of any
>inconsistencies. Could someone from MSFT guide me as to
>what is wrong with my pc. I am using Windows XP
>Professional Edition. And in case it is relevant, I have
>two hard drives of 6 and 5 partitions respectively.
Plus,
>I am running a P4 1.6 GHz processor over Intel D850MV
>motherboard with all the latest bios drivers.
>
>Thanking in anticipation over a useful guideline......
>.
>
1/
ms warns you of possible inconsistencies in
'converting to ntfs' - ie
Convert
....
Remarks
....
The location of the MFT is different on volumes that have
been converted from previous version of NTFS, so volume
performance might not be as good on volumes converted
from Windows NT.
Volumes converted from FAT to NTFS lack some performance
benefits compared to volumes initially formatted with
NTFS. On converted volumes, the MFT might become
fragmented. In addition, on converted boot volumes, NTFS
permissions are not applied after the volume is
converted.
2/
scandisk - no longer supported/avail in win xp
chkdsk.exe/checkdisk/ - now used in win xp - as it was
orig used in win ver 2-6+
note
avail in 'gui or command prompt/command line'
3/
win xp - does not normally start 'checkdisk' at
'start up' - tho it does on 'certain prob conditions'
or give you the option to run/esp when you have
'ntfs - req disk to be locked/ie before win xp runs'
4/
chk w/seagate on 'operating conditions' of their
'diskwizard 2003 under win xp os' for details/info
5/
'checkdisk' - can be run repeatedly til it has
cleaned up 'disk errors/flaws'
6/
if you haven't already done so - you might consider
'splitting up your pagefile' - and/or having a
'pagefile for ea hd'
ie
How to Configure Paging Files for Optimization and
Recovery in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/search/preview.aspx?
scid=kb;en-us;Q314482
and
take it fr there
hth
God Bless
hutch
>-----Original Message-----
> A few weeks earlier, I installed a new seagate hard
>drive on my pc and I transferred my my OS files on the
>new hard disk/partition using Seagate Diskwizard 2003.
>Everything was successfully done and the new drive
>successully booted into the OS. Another change that I
did
>was that I changed my file system to NTFS. Now I am
>experiencing a changed behaviour on my system.
>(1) Previously, whenever my computer had shut down
>improperly (because of a power failure), scandisk used
to
>automatically scan for any changes. Since the above
>upgradation/changed file system/new hard drive, I have
>never seen scandisk appearing automatically. My question
>is; Is it normal behaviour? or something is wrong with
my
>pc. Is it normal for my pc not to start automatic
>scandisk after an improper shut down under NTFS.
>(2) After this new situation, whenever, my pc shuts
>down improperly, I manually prefer a complete scan using
>the properties of my OS partition (C drive in my case)
>and accepting a scan at the next startup (as it prompts
>me so). The problem here is that after every scan, a
>report named 'bootex' is generated and almost everytime
I
>find some minor inconsistencies on my drive. They,
>however, do not appear again after a consecutive 2 or
>three complete scans. As a guide, I am posting the
report
>(bootex)generated by windows in double quotes:
>
>""Checking file system on C:
>The type of the file system is NTFS.
>Volume label is USMAN.
>
>A disk check has been scheduled.
>Windows will now check the disk.
>Cleaning up minor inconsistencies on the drive.
>Cleaning up 4 unused index entries from index $SII of
>file 0x9.
>Cleaning up 4 unused index entries from index $SDH of
>file 0x9.
>Cleaning up 4 unused security descriptors.
>CHKDSK is verifying file data (stage 4 of 5)...
>File data verification completed.
>CHKDSK is verifying free space (stage 5 of 5)...
>Free space verification is complete.
>
..............note - clipped here........................
>
>
>My question here is that Is it a cause of concern for me
>to have unused index entries (sometimes there are 2 or 4
>or 6 or 8 unused index entries). And as I said earlier,
>it takes me 2 or 3 scans to have a report devoid of any
>inconsistencies. Could someone from MSFT guide me as to
>what is wrong with my pc. I am using Windows XP
>Professional Edition. And in case it is relevant, I have
>two hard drives of 6 and 5 partitions respectively.
Plus,
>I am running a P4 1.6 GHz processor over Intel D850MV
>motherboard with all the latest bios drivers.
>
>Thanking in anticipation over a useful guideline......
>.
>