Surface checking whole drive: use Svend's Findbad ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Smith
  • Start date Start date
J

John Smith

Need to test my backup hard drive after it got dropped on the desk.

Is it better to surface check the whole drive at once rather than surface
check each partition separately?

Would Svend's "Findbad" do this whole-drive check?

Can any utility software get the hard drive to map any bad sectors not to be
used? Or does this mapping happen automatically inside the drive after the
drive has realized it has come across a bad sector duting a surface check?
 
John Smith said:
Need to test my backup hard drive after it got dropped on the desk.

Is it better to surface check the whole drive at once rather than surface
check each partition separately?

Would Svend's "Findbad" do this whole-drive check?

Can any utility software get the hard drive to map any bad sectors not to be
used? Or does this mapping happen automatically inside the drive after the
drive has realized it has come across a bad sector duting a surface check?
Click to expand...

You could also use the diskmanufacturer utility or HD Workbench (requires
Windows) from the site in my sig.

--
Regards,
Joep

http://www.diydatarecovery.nl
http://www.diydatarecovery.com
 
John Smith said in news:[email protected]:
Need to test my backup hard drive after it got dropped on the desk.

Is it better to surface check the whole drive at once rather than
surface check each partition separately?

Would Svend's "Findbad" do this whole-drive check?

Can any utility software get the hard drive to map any bad sectors
not to be used? Or does this mapping happen automatically inside the
drive after the drive has realized it has come across a bad sector
duting a surface check?
Click to expand...

Go to the web site for the manufacturer of your hard drive to see if
they provide their own hard disk diagnostic software.
 
Need to test my backup hard drive after it got dropped on the desk.

Is it better to surface check the whole drive at once rather than surface
check each partition separately?
Click to expand...

It shouldn't matter, though the best test is one done with manufacturer's
utility which does typically check whole drive.
Would Svend's "Findbad" do this whole-drive check?

Can any utility software get the hard drive to map any bad sectors not to be
used? Or does this mapping happen automatically inside the drive after the
drive has realized it has come across a bad sector duting a surface check?
Click to expand...

Bad sectors are automatically flagged and replaced with spares without any
utility or intervention by the user. You'll never know it happened. Once
all spares are gone then you'll get "visible" bad sectors.

You might want to run multiple passes, not just testing it once.
 
kony said:
It shouldn't matter, though the best test is one done with manufacturer's
utility which does typically check whole drive.


Bad sectors are automatically flagged and replaced with spares without any
utility or intervention by the user.
Click to expand...

Utterly clueless.
You obviously never checked a drive manual on how it actually works.
You'll never know it happened.
Click to expand...

That's the idea.
For marginal, i.e. recoverable read error bad sectors, not unrecoverable read
error bad sectors. Unfortunately unrecoverable read error bad sectors happen.
Once all spares are gone then you'll get "visible" bad sectors.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.
You obviously have never seen unrecoverable read error bad sectors.
Those are only replaced on writes, and will always be visible on reads,
spares available or not.
 
John Smith said:
Need to test my backup hard drive after it got dropped on the desk.

Is it better to surface check the whole drive at once rather than surface
check each partition separately?
Click to expand...

Is there a difference?
Would Svend's "Findbad" do this whole-drive check?
Click to expand...

Unless you tell it to do a limited number of cylinders, yes.
Not that it does actually check "cylinders".
Can any utility software get the hard drive to map any bad sectors not to be
used?
Click to expand...

Yes, they call it 'scandisk' or 'checkdisk' in Windows.
Or does this mapping happen automatically inside the drive after the
drive has realized it has come across a bad sector during a surface check?
Click to expand...

Only for recoverable read error bad sectors that take more than a defined
number of retries to be read successfully.
 
Need to test my backup hard drive after it got dropped on the desk.

Is it better to surface check the whole drive at once rather than surface
check each partition separately?

Would Svend's "Findbad" do this whole-drive check?

Can any utility software get the hard drive to map any bad sectors not to be
used? Or does this mapping happen automatically inside the drive after the
drive has realized it has come across a bad sector duting a surface check?
Click to expand...

I've heard very good reports about Spinrite,
http://grc.com/spinrite.htm

To quote from their website:
SpinRite examines the data storage surface of a drive one region at a time.
It first reads the data out of a region, then exercises that region with patterns
of data that SpinRite has determined are the most difficult for the drive to
read and write. In this way, any weak and failing areas within the region are
located and removed from use while none of the drive's original data is being
stored there. Only after the region has been made absolutely safe, will the
drive's original data be restored to that area.
Click to expand...
This crucial process of testing the surface of a drive WHILE IT CONTAINS
DATA is COMPLETELY UNIQUE to SpinRite. No other disk utility has ever
done this.
Click to expand...

I have no connection with the site or company, I'm just an impressed
techie.

Cheers
Jon
 
Jonski said in news:[email protected]:
I've heard very good reports about Spinrite,
http://grc.com/spinrite.htm
Click to expand...

I used Spinrite several years back. Lost my copy so I couldn't get the
next version at an upgrade price and haven't bothered to buy it again.
Still, it was a good utility. It also would check for "soft" sectors,
those in which their retentivity was getting low (all magnetic media
lose their retention over time) and mark them as bad, plus it would
refresh all data (all magnetic media incurs dipole stress which tends to
align them and weaken your data). Floppies are notories for this and
refreshing was easy, but then so is copying the files to your hard
drive, formatting the floppy, and copying the files back. It even
brought some drives back from the dead. I also used it for plated
drives because it would show a physical map of the sectors and I could
see where the plated surface was starting to bubble away from the
substrate. If I was repairing computers, Spinrite would definitely be
in my toolbox. I just haven't need of it for several years. Usually
the computers get expired and cycled out before the hard drives become a
problem, and data backups and drive images usually cover our butts, so a
dead or flaky hard drive is always a good excuse for replacing it ...
with an even bigger drive (there's a method to my madness of not using
Spinrite anymore since it's always nicer to get a bigger drive next
time).
 
I used Spinrite several years back. Lost my copy so I couldn't get the
next version at an upgrade price and haven't bothered to buy it again.
Still, it was a good utility.
Click to expand...

I've re-visited the website after not thinking about it for a year or
two, and it's starting to look a little limited and old now. They need
to add support for NTFS partitions, and I reckon they should GPL-it
and let the Linux community at it.

However, John Smith in the first post was looking for something to
check his dropped backup drive.
[snip]
data backups and drive images usually cover our butts, so a
dead or flaky hard drive is always a good excuse for replacing it ...
with an even bigger drive (there's a method to my madness of not using
Spinrite anymore since it's always nicer to get a bigger drive next
time).
Click to expand...

Seeing as this *is* the backup that's had the accident, I'd either
test with this utility, assuming it's IDE and FAT, DOS-mountable, or
I'd get a new drive and make a new backup. Certainly Spinrite it not a
lot cheaper than replacing the drive.

Cheers
Jon
 
What a stupid idea ..
Click to expand...

Because...?

I only mentioned this because the app seems to be getting old. Their
sales revenues will be dropping for the product and will eventually
cease unless it's kept updated. So either update it, sell it to
someone who will, or set if Free. It would be a shame to lose it.

Cheers
Jon
 
Jonski said:
Because...?

I only mentioned this because the app seems to be getting old. Their
sales revenues will be dropping for the product and will eventually
cease unless it's kept updated. So either update it, sell it to
someone who will, or set if Free. It would be a shame to lose it.
Click to expand...
Anyone who has read the SpinRite marketing bullshit recognizes it is a fraud.

None of those bad sector techniques have worked for over 10 years.
 
Jonski said:
Because...?

I only mentioned this because the app seems to be getting old. Their
sales revenues will be dropping for the product and will eventually
cease unless it's kept updated. So either update it, sell it to
someone who will, or set if Free.
Click to expand...

Aren't you forgetting an option?
It would be a shame to lose it.
Click to expand...

Ah, there it is. Just let it die, thousands of tools that once existed
simply died. This is better IMO than having the GPL/Linux get at it and feed
this mentality of getting stuff for free. Just because a product reaches
it's 'end of life' doesn't mean the Linux clan should have it. There may be
competative products, they'd all of a sudden have to fight a 'free'
opponent.
 
Jonski said:
I've re-visited the website after not thinking about it for a year or
two, and it's starting to look a little limited and old now. They need
to add support for NTFS partitions, and I reckon they should GPL-it
and let the Linux community at it.
Click to expand...

BTW - a new Spinrite version IS on the way.
 
Jonski said in news:[email protected]:
I've re-visited the website after not thinking about it for a year or
two, and it's starting to look a little limited and old now. They need
to add support for NTFS partitions, and I reckon they should GPL-it
and let the Linux community at it.
Click to expand...

True. After you mention it, another reason why I never bothered looking
at or getting Spinrite is that it appeared to have stagnated. His site
lists version 5.0 as the latest. A Google search on "Spinrite 5.0"
turns up reviews or mentions of this version back in November 1999.
Besides never mentioning NTFS in his brochure and manual for Spinrite,
it definitely doesn't mention USB-connected drives. Pity, it used to be
a good utility. I wonder what replaces it now. I only responded
because Jonski mentioned it and I recalled used it many, many moons ago.
However, John Smith in the first post was looking for something to
check his dropped backup drive.

Seeing as this *is* the backup that's had the accident, I'd either
test with this utility, assuming it's IDE and FAT, DOS-mountable, or
I'd get a new drive and make a new backup. Certainly Spinrite it not a
lot cheaper than replacing the drive.
Click to expand...

That's why I do *not* use hard drives for backups. You are susceptible
to mechanical and electronic failure either through wear, surges, or
abuse. With tapes, CDs, DVDs, Zip disks, or other removable media, you
just get another same-type drive. Density and speed are the advantages
to using hard disks, so I suppose it would be okay for your first line
of backup (i.e., the son in the grandfather-father-son rotation set).
 
Joep said in news:[email protected]:
BTW - a new Spinrite version IS on the way.
Click to expand...

A utility that doesn't provide updates, especially to match the pace of
hardware changes, guarantees itself obsolescence and obscurity. A
Google search on "Spinrite 5.0", the latest version mentioned at
grc.com, found articles back in November 1999 mentioning it, so it came
out around that time or maybe even earlier. 4+ years is far too long
between versions. I used it a long time ago and it was handy then. I
remember seeing it stagnate and after losing my copy then there was
definitely no reason to monitor it further.

I used to be a customer and was very pleased with the product way back
then. But if after 4 years (maybe 5) for the next catch-up version to
appear then Gibson will have to do a hell of a lot of convincing for me
to try it again, assuming there isn't already something out there to do
the same and which never did stagnate.
 
Joep said in news:[email protected]:
You can find more info in the GRC newsgroup grc.spinrite.dev
Click to expand...

By the way, you'll have to connect to news.grc.com to see that
newsgroup. I don't think the GRC news server syncs up with others;
i.e., it is a publicly accessible "private" newsgroup in that you have
to connect to that server to see those newsgroups.
 
*Vanguard* said in news:[email protected]:
... A Google search on
"Spinrite 5.0" turns up reviews or mentions of this version back in
November 1999. ...
Click to expand...

Just took a look at http://grc.com/srhistory.htm. Guess 5.0 came out in
early 1998. Uffda! Even older than I thought.

Windows NT 3.51 was released in May 1995 so it is peculiar that Spinrite
5.0 did not have support for NTFS when released 3 years later. When and
if version 6.x gets released, I wonder how old will already be its
hardware and file system support.
 
Back
Top