Dell 780 Problem:

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:39:31 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:35:18 -0600, Wildman wrote:

On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 21:10:10 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 20:34:26 -0600, wrote:

The SVI folders are all empty.

How are you verifying that? Windows Explorer isn't going to help, but
you can use a few other methods. I use Treesize Free to explore in
there, but Linux should also work. Be careful, though, some folks report
that their PC will no longer boot after mucking around in there.

There is no danger in "reading" a file system no matter
what method or OS you are using. The mucking around
you mentioned would only occur if the user done something
that caused the file system to be written to.

I was being respectful toward frequent contributor "Paul", who has
related his experience that just looking around caused one of his
systems to be unbootable into Windows, unless I'm misunderstanding what
he said. But yes, at least in my case, just looking around has never
caused me any issues.

I mean no disrespect either but, I sand by what I
said. "Mucking around" does not occur as long as
the file system remains read-only. Period.

--
Wildman GNU/Linux user #557453
The cow died so I don't need your bull!

Wildman wrote:
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:39:31 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:35:18 -0600, Wildman wrote:

On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 21:10:10 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 20:34:26 -0600, wrote:

The SVI folders are all empty.
How are you verifying that? Windows Explorer isn't going to help, but
you can use a few other methods. I use Treesize Free to explore in
there, but Linux should also work. Be careful, though, some folks report
that their PC will no longer boot after mucking around in there.
There is no danger in "reading" a file system no matter
what method or OS you are using. The mucking around
you mentioned would only occur if the user done something
that caused the file system to be written to.
I was being respectful toward frequent contributor "Paul", who has
related his experience that just looking around caused one of his
systems to be unbootable into Windows, unless I'm misunderstanding what
he said. But yes, at least in my case, just looking around has never
caused me any issues.

I mean no disrespect either but, I sand by what I
said. "Mucking around" does not occur as long as
the file system remains read-only. Period.


Well, it surprised the hell out of me.

I was using the "sum" command on the large files
I found in System Volume Information. All of the
large files have a sum of "00000". I thought that
was pretty neat. These could well have been some
representation of a shadow copy.

Well, after I summed those files in SVI (which is *read*
not write), I could no longer boot Windows 7. The
automatic repair tried three times to repair it,
the third pass being a block by block CHKDSK
scan (takes an hour). And nada. Could not recover.
Since I had a backup that coincidentally had
been made only two hours before, I just restored,
rather than make a lifetime research project of it.
I wasn't planning on trashing the OS that day,
and got really lucky on having a backup.

So while I still feel perfectly safe using Linux
for both read and write on NTFS, the experience
did shake my confidence just a tiny bit. And
I feel there is some property of those files
that isn't "normal". The checksum of exactly
zero on each (1GB or so) file, was pretty
weird. What was it reading ? Dunno.

I wouldn't think of writing to those files.
I know better than that. Reading them would change
the "Last Accessed" time, that's assuming Linux
even enables that. On Windows, you can disable
Last Accessed tracking if you want, without side effects
(I think people do that for SSD drive usage).

Paul

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 23:01:12 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

If you open mystery files in IrfanView, then - at least if it's one of
the common image formats, I'm not sure if it now does it for other types
- if it is a type it recognises, it will popup something like "xxx is a
.jpg file with incorrect extension. Rename?" (Even if you say no [in
which case it doesn't rename!], it still _displays_ them.)

Hmmmmmm, I never knew that was possible. I'll have to try it. Seems
easier than using the Hex Editor. With the Hex Editor, I still dont know
which .jpg I found, till I open it. Much of the time they are something
useless like a facebook icon or advertisment.

I have always used Acdsee for image viewing, but I have installed and
occasionally used Infranview.

In message ,
writes:
[]
I have a small Hex Editor that will read anything. As long as I ONLY
READ it, nothing gets screwed up. Most of the time binary files are not
readable anyhow, but the header will contain some regular text, showing
me that the file is a .jpg image or a .exe file, etc...

I often use that to open something in my browser cache. Those cache
files have no extensions, and maybe I want to save an image that a
website wont allow downloading. Using the hex editor, I can see if a
file is an image type. If it is, I can rename it with the extension and
view it. The file sizes usually tell me if the cache item is htm (text)
or more likely an image or sound file, etc...

If you open mystery files in IrfanView, then - at least if it's one of
the common image formats, I'm not sure if it now does it for other types
- if it is a type it recognises, it will popup something like "xxx is a
..jpg file with incorrect extension. Rename?" (Even if you say no [in
which case it doesn't rename!], it still _displays_ them.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Someone once said that scientists and prostitutes get paid for doing what they
enjoy. - Prof Stepehen Hawking in RT 2013/12/7-13

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:01:31 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:39:31 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote:

But yes, at least in my case, just looking around has never
caused me any issues.


I was just "looking around" in my garage the other day. I was looking
for something and didn't look where I was going, so I tripped and fell
on the floor.

Fortunately, I didn't break anything, but I did have (and still have)
some issues--bruises and pain. vbg

LOL Keeping it real.

--

Char Jackson

Glad your OK Ken but please be careful,
it's those kind of falls that can lead to
serious issues.

I know from experience,...

Robert

In message , Paul
writes:
Mark Twain wrote:
I contacted Crucial and this is their replies:
Hello Robert,
Thank you for contacting Crucial! I am sorry to
say, but it looks like the order encountered an error. The charge
you see will drop off and release the hold on your funds shortly.
[]
That seems like a pretty absurd response from them.
[]
Sometimes, transactions get blocked based on your
location. For example, when I bought a copy of Nero
CD burning software, the payment processing was done
in Germany. And based on my credit card usage, seeing
a charge in Germany caused the credit card company
to block the transaction, until I phoned them and
said it was OK. The Crucial payment processing is
likely to be in the US, so it shouldn't have happened.
[]
Assuming "Mark Twain" is also in the US, of course (-:!
(One _assumes_ that someone choosing that identity will be, but you
never know ...)

Though I (in the UK) have bought things from the US before without my
CCC raising any problem. But that may vary from company to company.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The early worm gets the bird.

Yes,.born in the USA,

Robert

I meant I'll wait until I have the DIMMS before
clearing the cache and cookies and the other two
you recommended.

Robert

This is their response after my last email to them:

Hello Robert,

Thank you for contacting Crucial.

We had stated, no order had been place
with the email address you contacted us
with. After looking more in depth into
this we have found the order placed with
a different email address. I have included
your order number and tracking number below.



If you have further questions, we welcome
your email reply. You can also visit our
Contact page at http://www.crucial.com/usa/
en/support-contact for other ways to reach us.

Best Wishes,
KATHRYN PETERS
E-Commerce Sales and Support
Micron Technology, Inc.


Well,.. what d-ya know, I was right all along,.
all they had to do was a little bit of work on
their end.

I noticed they made no apologies for the inconvenience
they put me through and I was ready to go to the bank
tomorrow.

I'll do the Memtest when they arrive,.

Robert

Last response and apology from Crucial

Hello Robert,

Thank you for contacting Crucial.com!
Just before I clicked send on the last
e-mail I sent you, I captured this order
number xxxxxx, by translating the web
order in your e-mail. I apologize for
this confusion and inconvenience. I
searched the e-mail you sent your e-mail
from and no order was found. Only after
realizing there was a web order did I
discover your order. The order shows as
being shipped:

He gave order number and tracking information in here.


If you have further questions, we welcome
your reply. You can also visit our Contact
page at http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/support
contact for other ways to reach us.

Best Regards,

JAMESON A.
E-Commerce Sales and Support
Micron Technology, Inc.

The DIMMS arrived today and I made sure the
Memtest CD was in the 780 before I switched
the DIMMS so that it would do the Memtest
before Windows could sign on.

Both DIMMS completed (1) pass with no errors.
I then put in the other DIMMS to test both but
forgot to put in the CD! So when the sign-on screen
came up I selected shut-down and inserted the CD.
Will that be OK?

It's running the dual DIMM test now,.....

I put the old DIMMS in the clear plastic cases
the new ones came in to serve as spares just in
case since we already tested them.

Is there any other tests I should do on the 780
or 8500?

Thanks,
Robert

I completed the dual DIMMS test with no errors.

How shall I proceed or am I done? I think I'll
keep the Memtest CD for future use.

I'm just thinking,. although the 8500 Memtest
showed no errors do you think I should also replace
the 8500 DIMMS with matching DIMMS? I remember you
commenting they were all matched and were all the
same speed. What do you think? How often should DIMMS
be replaced?


Thanks,
Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
The DIMMS arrived today and I made sure the
Memtest CD was in the 780 before I switched
the DIMMS so that it would do the Memtest
before Windows could sign on.

Both DIMMS completed (1) pass with no errors.
I then put in the other DIMMS to test both but
forgot to put in the CD! So when the sign-on screen
came up I selected shut-down and inserted the CD.
Will that be OK?

It's running the dual DIMM test now,.....

I put the old DIMMS in the clear plastic cases
the new ones came in to serve as spares just in
case since we already tested them.

Is there any other tests I should do on the 780
or 8500?

Thanks,
Robert

The best way to do it, is to boot a Linux LiveCD and
run mprime from there. That prevents Windows from running,
until the memory testing is finished.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime9...stress_testing

https://www.mersenne.org/download/

Unfortunately, there are no simple one-click boot CDs
all set up for you, to run that. There is no CD that is
quite like the memtest disc you've been using. They
all require some setup work.

You can also run that from Windows, but then that
violates the rule of completing the memory testing
before booting Windows. If you're bored, you can
certainly give it a try (in Windows). Select the
download that best fits your OS (64-bit).

When the program asks "Join GIMPS", say No, just stress testing.

The stress test in that program, was intended to weed
out bad computers from computing prime numbers. Joining
GIMPS involves donating computer time (and electricity)
to their attempts to find larger and larger prime numbers.
There is a small cash reward to the person whose computer
computes a winner. (And it takes a couple months for a
powerful computer, to double-check that the winning client
really computed a winner.) But people don't join GIMPS
for cash. There are plenty of other "computer schemes",
with a more direct effort versus cash relationship. The odds
are extremely low of getting a thing, if you joined GIMPs.
It's a kind of "math geek" thing. But their stress tester
is good, and I like it.

At the sign of an error, a thread of execution stops, and
for the version with the GUI, the thread color indicator
turns Red, and that's when you know some of your hardware
stinks :-) The Windows version has a GUI.

My old AthlonXP overclocked processor, the Prime95 program
would turn Red in only two seconds. And that means the
CPU is really unstable and making math errors like crazy.
You fix that by turning down the clock speed. I only
tested that (for a short time), just to see it
really didn't make the computer any faster for
practical work. So I went back to stock speed,
which is error free. On that processor, the system
bus is too slow, and the poor processor is "starved"
at high speeds.

Paul

Mark Twain wrote:
I completed the dual DIMMS test with no errors.

How shall I proceed or am I done? I think I'll
keep the Memtest CD for future use.

I'm just thinking,. although the 8500 Memtest
showed no errors do you think I should also replace
the 8500 DIMMS with matching DIMMS? I remember you
commenting they were all matched and were all the
same speed. What do you think? How often should DIMMS
be replaced?


Thanks,
Robert


As long as the 8500 passed your test, there's
nothing to do.

The purpose of testing an existing set of DIMMs,
is just to verify they're still in good shape. If they
pass, then you can do the test again in a years time.

What you're looking for, is unsuspected trouble. Where
there weren't any other symptoms. And so you do your
check on them once a year "to keep them honest".

If the machine has been performing well with the 12GB now
installed, I see no reason to mess around with the setup.

As far as I know, your DIMMs are already in matched
sets, a pair of 4GB sticks and a pair of 2GB sticks.

If you check in Task Manager on a daily basis, I doubt
you're getting even remotely close to the "top of RAM".
It would take a lot of Firefox tabs to do that.

Paul