B
Ben
The other night I was copying data (about 60gb) from an 80gb external
USB drive onto my relatively new 200gb hard drive. About a third of
the way through the transfer stalled, so I cancelled it and attempted
to restart it from where it stalled at. The file transfer window
popped up but no data started trasnferring, so I attempted to cancel
again which brought my computer to its knees, I tried closing
applications and such, but my computer just became completely frozen.
Not knowing what else to do, I restarted. When windows loaded up the
main data partion on the 200gb drive (190 of the 200gb) was no longer
recognized by windows. The next time I restarted windows told me the
other partition on the drive needed to be scanned and then proceeded
to spent the next few hours spitting out the message "Bad link in
cluster xxxxxx. corrected." It was at 340,000 after five hours, at
which point I turned off my monitor and went to sleep. The small
parition is now mostly filled with a FOUND.000 folder.
Also, partition magic sees two unallocated blocks where the one giant
partition used to be.
Upon a friends suggestion I downloaded findpart and ran that with the
following results:
Findpart, version 4.53 - for Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 1999-2004.
OS: Windows 5.0.2195 Service Pack 4
Disk: 2 Cylinders: 16709 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 131069
--PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB --Start CHS- ---End CHS-- BS CHS
0+- 0C 0 19551042 9546 0 1 1 1216 254 63 B OK
1217+- 0B 0468840896228926 1217 1 1 30400 254 62 B OK?
------FAT CHS -Size Cl --Root -Good -Rep. Maybe --Bad YY-MM-DD DataMB
0 1 33 9538 8 2* 9538 0 0 0 1
1217 1 33 Second FAT not found.
Partitions according to partition tables on second harddisk:
--PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB --Start CHS- ---End CHS-- BS CHS
0 1 0C 63 19551042 9546 0 1 1 1216*254 63 NB OK
0 2 0F 19551105468840960228926 1217# 0 1 30400*254 63 OK?
No signature CHS: 1217 0 1
I have been informed that letting windows fix the other partition on
the disk might have been a bad idea, but hopefully Svend or someone
else with knowledge on the subject here will be able to help me.
Thanks,
Ben
USB drive onto my relatively new 200gb hard drive. About a third of
the way through the transfer stalled, so I cancelled it and attempted
to restart it from where it stalled at. The file transfer window
popped up but no data started trasnferring, so I attempted to cancel
again which brought my computer to its knees, I tried closing
applications and such, but my computer just became completely frozen.
Not knowing what else to do, I restarted. When windows loaded up the
main data partion on the 200gb drive (190 of the 200gb) was no longer
recognized by windows. The next time I restarted windows told me the
other partition on the drive needed to be scanned and then proceeded
to spent the next few hours spitting out the message "Bad link in
cluster xxxxxx. corrected." It was at 340,000 after five hours, at
which point I turned off my monitor and went to sleep. The small
parition is now mostly filled with a FOUND.000 folder.
Also, partition magic sees two unallocated blocks where the one giant
partition used to be.
Upon a friends suggestion I downloaded findpart and ran that with the
following results:
Findpart, version 4.53 - for Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 1999-2004.
OS: Windows 5.0.2195 Service Pack 4
Disk: 2 Cylinders: 16709 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 131069
--PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB --Start CHS- ---End CHS-- BS CHS
0+- 0C 0 19551042 9546 0 1 1 1216 254 63 B OK
1217+- 0B 0468840896228926 1217 1 1 30400 254 62 B OK?
------FAT CHS -Size Cl --Root -Good -Rep. Maybe --Bad YY-MM-DD DataMB
0 1 33 9538 8 2* 9538 0 0 0 1
1217 1 33 Second FAT not found.
Partitions according to partition tables on second harddisk:
--PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB --Start CHS- ---End CHS-- BS CHS
0 1 0C 63 19551042 9546 0 1 1 1216*254 63 NB OK
0 2 0F 19551105468840960228926 1217# 0 1 30400*254 63 OK?
No signature CHS: 1217 0 1
I have been informed that letting windows fix the other partition on
the disk might have been a bad idea, but hopefully Svend or someone
else with knowledge on the subject here will be able to help me.
Thanks,
Ben