| Author |
Question about Microsoft's Format command
|
|
| yukuan 2005-06-25, 5:47 pm |
| Are a disk's bad sectors marked while formatting?
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-25, 5:47 pm |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119723267.948141.224470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Are a disk's bad sectors marked while formatting?
The simple answer is yes. But I suspect you need to ask a more precise
question. What do you have in mind when you say "bad sectors marked "?
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-25, 5:47 pm |
| I means it recording which sector is bad in the FAT, while formatting
with fat16, fat32 etc.
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-25, 5:47 pm |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119724277.788790.61400@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I means it recording which sector is bad in the FAT, while formatting
> with fat16, fat32 etc.
In general on a modern HD there should be no bad sectors.
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-25, 5:47 pm |
| How about the virtual HD, flash pendrive?
| |
| Maxim S. Shatskih 2005-06-25, 5:47 pm |
| Yes. FORMAT is who creates the new empty FS volume, the bad blocks are
marked during this.
--
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119723267.948141.224470@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Are a disk's bad sectors marked while formatting?
>
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-26, 2:45 am |
| THX all you for these response.
I still have some questions:
How does FORMAT decide that a block is bad?
Does It use the procedure of write, read and compare.
or just decide bad block via got a action-fail message from the
storage's controller?
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-26, 2:45 am |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119764390.690762.268870@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> THX all you for these response.
> I still have some questions:
> How does FORMAT decide that a block is bad?
Writes it and sees if it can be read.
> Does It use the procedure of write, read and compare.
Right but I don't think there's a compare.
> or just decide bad block via got a action-fail message from the
> storage's controller?
That happens on a write fail and a read fail. The read fail is the usual
case.
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-26, 2:45 am |
| Still,
during the lifetime after FORMAT, what's going on if the storage gets
new bad blocks?
Will these bad blocks be recorded?
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-26, 7:46 am |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119767127.694486.251990@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Still,
> during the lifetime after FORMAT, what's going on if the storage gets
> new bad blocks?
Mostly the drive detects a block going bad before it's completely
unreadable. The drive flaws(replaces it with a good one) the sector and you
never see a thing. Occasionally if the sector goes bad while it's holding
file data then the file will become unreadable and the sector show up as a
visible bad sector. When many visible bad sectors start showing then the
drive is likely about to die.
> Will these bad blocks be recorded?
"recorded"?
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-27, 2:46 am |
| Ron Reaugh wrote:
> Mostly the drive detects a block going bad before it's completely
> unreadable. The drive flaws(replaces it with a good one) the sector and you
> never see a thing. Occasionally if the sector goes bad while it's holding
> file data then the file will become unreadable and the sector show up as a
> visible bad sector. When many visible bad sectors start showing then the
> drive is likely about to die.
Are the visible bad sectors going to be marked into the FAT?
>
> "recorded"?
I meant the new visible bad blocks are marked/signed/redorded into the
FAT.
Thank you.
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-27, 2:46 am |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119839887.413654.4400@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Ron Reaugh wrote:
you[vbcol=seagreen]
holding[vbcol=seagreen]
a[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Are the visible bad sectors going to be marked into the FAT?
Visible = = "marked into the FAT"
| |
| Maxim S. Shatskih 2005-06-27, 7:47 am |
| > I still have some questions:
> How does FORMAT decide that a block is bad?
> Does It use the procedure of write, read and compare.
No, it uses IOCTL_DISK_VERIFY.
--
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com
| |
| Ramesh Pun 2005-06-28, 8:46 pm |
| That is a funny statement :-)
"Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Fuhve.1025350$w62.420029@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1119724277.788790.61400@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> In general on a modern HD there should be no bad sectors.
>
>
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-29, 2:46 am |
|
"Ramesh Pun" <spamme@spamme.com> wrote in message
news:11c3qf14t25pg2a@corp.supernews.com...
> That is a funny statement :-)
A correct one however. I should have said no visible bad sectors. Every
drive has lots of bad sectors but the drive itself keeps these isolated and
out of the way and invisible.
>
> "Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:Fuhve.1025350$w62.420029@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-29, 5:47 pm |
|
Ron Reaugh wrote:
> "Ramesh Pun" <spamme@spamme.com> wrote in message
> news:11c3qf14t25pg2a@corp.supernews.com...
>
> A correct one however. I should have said no visible bad sectors. Every
> drive has lots of bad sectors but the drive itself keeps these isolated and
> out of the way and invisible.
What if the drive gets _too_ many bad sectors?
Is it goint to crash?
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-29, 5:47 pm |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120054213.053949.157610@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Ron Reaugh wrote:
Every[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> What if the drive gets _too_ many bad sectors?
Retire the drive.
> Is it goint to crash?
More bad sectors than the drive can handle internally could be used as a
definition of a drive crashing.
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-29, 8:45 pm |
|
Ron Reaugh wrote:
>
> Retire the drive.
>
>
> More bad sectors than the drive can handle internally could be used as a
> definition of a drive crashing.
But FAT can handle bad sectors, couldn't it?
When does OS mark the bad sectors?
I think it may do it in two situations:
1. FORMAT time
2. Normal data access time
Am I right?
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-30, 2:46 am |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120097751.845132.248630@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Ron Reaugh wrote:
>
> But FAT can handle bad sectors, couldn't it?
Not without first being involved in a file going bad.
> When does OS mark the bad sectors?
Usually during the initial format and later if a file becomes unreadable.
> I think it may do it in two situations:
> 1. FORMAT time
> 2. Normal data access time
> Am I right?
Basically.
| |
| yukuan 2005-06-30, 2:46 am |
|
Ron Reaugh wrote:
>
> Not without first being involved in a file going bad.
>
>
> Usually during the initial format and later if a file becomes unreadable.
>
For FAT16 and FAT32 on MS's platform, is the statement above still true?
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-30, 2:46 am |
|
"yukuan" <yukuan.jiang@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120099645.674386.61450@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Ron Reaugh wrote:
>
unreadable.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> For FAT16 and FAT32 on MS's platform, is the statement above still true?
Yep.
| |
| Maxim S. Shatskih 2005-06-30, 5:51 pm |
| > > When does OS mark the bad sectors?
>
> Usually during the initial format and later if a file becomes unreadable.
The second part of the statement is valid for NTFS only.
--
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-30, 5:51 pm |
|
"Maxim S. Shatskih" <maxim@storagecraft.com> wrote in message
news:da0ver$27o3$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru...
unreadable.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> The second part of the statement is valid for NTFS only.
Nope, True for FAT and W98 and older MS FAT OSs. I assume it's also true
for FAT in NT4, W2K and WinXP although bad secors outside the drive are so
rare that I can't say I seen one in the more recent MS OS-s. Can you
provide any references for your claim?
| |
| Maxim S. Shatskih 2005-06-30, 5:51 pm |
| FASTFAT source from the MS IFS kit.
--
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com
"Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:X9Wwe.373801$cg1.361730@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Maxim S. Shatskih" <maxim@storagecraft.com> wrote in message
> news:da0ver$27o3$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru...
> unreadable.
>
> Nope, True for FAT and W98 and older MS FAT OSs. I assume it's also true
> for FAT in NT4, W2K and WinXP although bad secors outside the drive are so
> rare that I can't say I seen one in the more recent MS OS-s. Can you
> provide any references for your claim?
>
>
| |
| Ron Reaugh 2005-06-30, 5:51 pm |
|
"Maxim S. Shatskih" <maxim@storagecraft.com> wrote in message
news:da1ij0$2ipr$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru...
> FASTFAT source from the MS IFS kit.
Says what exactly for which OS version?
> "Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:X9Wwe.373801$cg1.361730@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
true[vbcol=seagreen]
so[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
| |
| Maxim S. Shatskih 2005-06-30, 5:51 pm |
| XP
No block remaps in FAT
With FAT, it is hard, since it is hard to find the previous block number -
the FAT list is single-linked.
--
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com
"Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:A3Zwe.1056381$w62.1009413@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Maxim S. Shatskih" <maxim@storagecraft.com> wrote in message
> news:da1ij0$2ipr$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru...
>
> Says what exactly for which OS version?
>
> true
> so
>
>
|
|
|
|