Hot answers tagged ntfs
I've had success with Sysinternals Process Explorer. With this, you can search to find what process(es) have a file open, and you can use it to close the handle(s) if you want. Of course, it is safer to close the whole process. Exercise caution and judgement. To find a specific file, use the menu option "Find->Find Handle or DLL..." Type in part of the ...
unlocker is also useful for this (works on both 32 and 64 bit)
Try the openfiles command.
Just be very careful with closing handles; it's even more dangerous than you'd think, because of handle recycling - if you close the file handle, and the program opens something else, that original file handle you closed may be reused for that "something else." And now guess what happens if the program continues, thinking it is working on the file (whose ...
I'd recommend using a regular file system instead of databases. Using file system is easier than a database, you can use normal tools to access files, file systems are designed for this kind of usage etc. NTFS should work just fine as a storage system. Do not store the actual path to database. Better to store the image's sequence number to database and have ...
Even assuming you meant GBps and not Gbps... I am unaware of any filesystem that has an actual throughput limit. Filesystems are simply structures around how to store and retrieve files. They use metadata, structure, naming conventions, security conventions, etc. but the actual throughput limitations are defined by the underlying hardware itself ...
I've used Handle with success to find such processes in the past.
When I've seen this it was because a process was holding the folder open but the folder was in the process of being deleted. Use a tool like Process Explorer to see if anything has an open handle on the folder. I would guess that once you release it or reboot, that folder will disappear.
subinacl is a Windows sysadmin's power tool for doing everything to do with ownership and ACLs. You can change the ownership to anyone other than just you (you can't do this with the GUI). subinacl /file test.txt /setowner=domain\foo This lets you set the permission to any user you like, without having to be an administrator (as I believe takeown.exe ...
NTFS just can't be accessed by more than one machine at the same time; even when you use Windows' Failover Clustering, only one node has real access to the volume at any given time, the other one is blocked from accessing it by the cluster subsystem. Accessing the volume from one server and sharing it out is really your only option here.
I'm going to put my 2 cents worth in on a piece of negative advice: Don't go with a database. I've been working with image storing databases for years: large (1 meg->1 gig) files, often changed, multiple versions of the file, accessed reasonably often. The database issues you run into with large files being stored are extremely tedious to deal with, writing ...
You're looking for "TAKEOWN.EXE", which was first in Windows Server 2003 as a standard component, and I believe a resource-kit item prior. See: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc738152(WS.10).aspx
You don't need to split this at all. Use parted to get details about the partition table: parted image001.dd In parted, switch to byte units with the command u, then B. After that, issue the command print. You will get an output that looks like this (output is from an actual system, not an image): Model: Virtio Block Device (virtblk) Disk /dev/vda: ...
It's much better to simply use kpartx tool. usage : kpartx [-a|-d|-l] [-v] wholedisk -a add partition devmappings -d del partition devmappings -l list partitions devmappings that would be added by -a ... Example: # kpartx -l whole_disk # only listing loop0p1 : 0 518144 /dev/loop0 2048 loop0p2 : 0 3674112 /dev/loop0 520192 # kpartx -a ...
For Windows 7 and Windows 8 you can use the built-in Resource Monitor for this. Open Resource Monitor, which can be found By searching in the start menu, or As a button on the Performance tab in your Task Manager Use the search field in the Associated Handles section on the CPU tab Pointed at by blue arrow in screen shot below In case it's not ...
Portability: the drive will be unreadable by computers running Windows 95, 98 or Me, (some)Linux, or any other non-Windows device. Longevity: NTFS will shorten the life of the drive. It is a journalling file system, which means that it logs changes, not just the end result, causing more writes to the drive. It also logs last access times for files, so even ...
Just remove modify permissions from anyone but the user account that creates the file. This kind of thing is exactly what NTFS rights are for.
As far as I know NTFS is not meant to be used like that and the only thing you will probably achieve this way is invalid data read from the filesystem. You can either unmount the filesystem from windows and mount it on linux for the migration, or you can use some clustering filesystem for this purpose. Unfortunatelly I know of no opensource cluster ...
"accumulated information that will take forever to recreate" - the time to prepare a backup / restore procedure is right now. Don't wait until the file is somehow deleted or overwritten, or the disk fails. A proper backup strategy with proven (and tested) restore capability is a must.
Microsoft distributes at least two Sysinternals tools for this. Junction lets you manipulate junction points (symbolic links). Streams will show you alternate data streams. That page also shows you the :stream syntax to manipulate them from command-line.
If you're talking about a disk that doesn't contain a Windows installation, just use the "TAKEOWN" and "ICACLS" utilities: TAKEOWN /f "X:\" /r /d y ICACLS "X:\" /reset /T Then you can reset the ACLs to whatever you want. If it's a disk with a Windows 2000, XP, or Server 2003 operating system installed (don't know about Vista on this one) you could try ...
Perhaps try ntfsfix (or similar program) in your favourite linux (or knoppix). Usually located in package 'ntfsprogs'. Sometimes trying to delete from Linux (with ntfs-3g or other ntfs-write-support) helps. Knoppix (Linux-Live-CD/DVD): http://www.knoppix.net/
No, if you want to spend the time doing that it's fine. Generally you won't get much for the time you spend doing it, though. Keep in mind that the 2% metric, however, doesn't tell you anything. Does that mean that only 2% of files are fragmented, or that 2% of the drive space has file fragments, or something else? For certain metrics a 2% fragmented ...
My approach is to not use file/directory level file permissions; use file share level permissions, and set the whole server filesystem data drive to Everyone Full Control (which becomes moot). Over the years (10+), I have found that NTFS permissions are more complex and leads to more errors. If the permissions are set wrong, or the inheritance gets broken, ...
Have you tried SpinRite? Steve knows his stuff, and SpinRate has saved my bacon before. The tool is very mature. You can purchase and download at grc.com. I am not a shill, just a customer.
16TiB is the maximum volume size with 4K clusters. You'll need to do one of: reformat with a larger cluster size change the cluster size to 8K (apparently Acronis can do so) create another NTFS volume so you can use that unallocated space. You can then mount that volume onto a folder in your C drive if you prefer having a single drive, but you'll have to ...
NTFS isn't a cluster-aware file system, I get what you're trying to do but there's no mechanism for NTFS to let the Linux box know it's been changed and from the Linux side it has no reason to assume things CAN change without those changes coming from itself. Basically you need to use a file-level sharing system or a multi-OS block-level cluster-aware file ...
I compress my IIS logs on a lot of IIS servers, albeit mainly servers that are hosting Outlook Web Access/App or low volume web sites. I have no problems doing it, and quite like the disk space savings. In general, you're trading CPU for storage by making this decision. If you're CPU-bound to begin with then this probably isn't a good tradeoff. For my OWA ...
I very much doubt there is a data transfer bottleneck related to a filesystem, because filesystems don't dictate implementation details that would hard-limit performance. A given driver for a filesystem on a particular config of hardware will have bottlenecks of course.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible