Search Results

Search found 19125 results on 765 pages for 'hard disk'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 106/765 | < Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >

  • Optimal disk partitions for database setup (15 Drives)

    - by Jason
    We are setting up a new database system and have 15 drives to play with (+2 on-board for the OS). With a total of 15 drives would it be better to setup all 14 as one RAID-10 block (+1 hot spare) OR split into two RAID-10 sets one for Data (8 disks) and one for logs/backups (6 disks). My question boils down to the following: is there a specific point where having more drives in a RAID-10 setup will out preform having the drives broken into smaller RAID-10 sets.

    Read the article

  • Writing to external drive runs out of space prematurely

    - by steve
    I have a USB 2.0, 500 GB HDD. I am writing a bunch of data to it, that I previously recovered from the drive. I have formatted the drive in exFAT, since the drive will be used with Windows and OSX. At first, I tried using Windows explorer to move the files over to the drive (about 160 GiB worth) but after copying about 30% of the data (according to TeraCopy), Windows Explorer reported the drive as out of space, and that it was completely full. WinDirStat only showed the size of data that had been copied over... Where did this extra space go? Why is there a 300+ GiB discrepancy between the usage reported by the files and what Explorer sees?

    Read the article

  • Suggestions for Backup solution

    - by jiewmeng
    i am considering between windows home server simple nas extra HDD's in desktop btw, i will be the main user i am looking to fulfil the following needs: reliability (i am think RAID 1 or 5) not so prone to virus/malware infections (will using a separate NAS or home server help? say windows home server is still a windows pc except separated by network?) power efficiency (eg. spin down when not in use) download (eg. i may want to dl big files/torrents overnight and i may not want to use a full powered PC for it? does a full pc vs NAS provide significant power usage to justify cost of new system esp. since i am only user?) performance (i guess i like to write/access my files fast, on 2nd thought, maybe for backup i can forgo this? maybe for a WD Green HDD? but how much slower will it be? plus since i am the only user, i think the whole HDD will be mine?)

    Read the article

  • Install Windows 8 Apps to custom directory

    - by Timothy Ford
    I'm running Windows 8 Pro on a laptop. I initially installed the OS just to fiddle round with it and get to know something I'd inevitably end up having to fix for someone. The problem being I only gave the partition about 32gb and that ran out pretty quick. I'd like to install office and get used to that as well but unfortunately I'm a few gigabytes short. I'd like to know if I can change the install location of office 2013 and other apps so that I can run them from another partition because there is no space left to the right of this partition I can't extend it.

    Read the article

  • Scratch disks on solid state drives

    - by Kato
    For something like Final Cut Pro where you have scratch disks, is it absolutely a bad idea to use a solid state drive? There would be a lot of writing, but I'm thinking it would be less for video editing then say, programming? The read/write cycles for SSDs still seem pretty long...

    Read the article

  • IBM BladeCenter S: Disk Configuration

    - by gravyface
    Have just the one storage bay right now (SAS 15K 600GB x 6) and have configured one storage pool in RAID 10 with 4 disks (and two global spares). For each blade, I've created a volume and mapped accordingly: Blade #1 400 GB Blade #2 200 GB Blade #3 100 GB Blade #4 100 GB When I boot up Blade 1 and enter into the UEFI Setup (F1) followed by the Adapters and UEFI Drivers LSI Logic Fusion MPT SAS Driver Utility, I see 4 disks: two are the on-board 73GB drives, the other two are 200GB each and assume I'm being presented with two logical disks from the volume I created and mapped to this blade. I was a bit surprised by this: I figured I would've been presented with one logical drive per volume, not two. I'm assuming I can just configure whatever RAID level I wish that supports two disks, but not really sure what the benefits/trade-offs here. Should I go with RAID 10 on top of RAID 10? RAID 0? Software RAID 0/1/10? Does it even matter? If this is "normal" to see two disks, then I'm going to likely just do some benchmarking and see if it makes a difference changing the RAID levels (my guess is no); if this is not normal, well, please let me know. :)

    Read the article

  • How can I automatically require a password when connecting to a WD MyBookLive?

    - by user-123
    I have created a user which has specific privileges to access the shares on our WD MyBookLive Network drive (ie it requires a password to connect), however after connecting once Windows seems to remember the password (or at least for the rest of the session). How can I make it so it is necessary to require a password every time the user connects to the drive or makes some change on Windows? I am particularly thinking of Cryptolocker and other variants of "ransomeware" which will try and connect to the drive and encrypt it.

    Read the article

  • Hiding mapped drives for all users but letting programs access them

    - by AgainstClint
    What I'm looking for (and not sure if it's possible) is that we have 16 mapped network drives that are mapped when any user logs on, what I would like is to cut this down to just one visible drive yet leaving the other ones still usable to certain programs. I would just un-map them, however one of our constantly used programs writes to almost all of the drive letters so they need to be mapped for just that program, however they do not need to be visible to the user. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Move EFI System Partition to another drive

    - by Pincopallino
    I had a Windows 8 installation on an HDD, using UEFI as boot. The HDD has the following GPT table: DISKPART> list partition Partizione ### Tipo Dim. Offset --------------- ---------------- ------- ------- Partizione 1 Ripristino 300 Mb 1024 Kb Partizione 2 Sistema 100 Mb 301 Mb Partizione 3 Riservato 128 Mb 401 Mb Partizione 4 Primario 390 Gb 529 Mb Partizione 5 Primario 540 Gb 390 Gb (I apologize it's in Italian, but the translation is quite straightforward). I recently bought an SSD drive, connected it and installed a fresh Windows 8. Now I have a working dual boot, but the UEFI partition is on the HDD instead of the SSD. Here's the SDD partition list: Partizione ### Tipo Dim. Offset --------------- ---------------- ------- ------- Partizione 1 Riservato 128 Mb 1024 Kb Partizione 2 Primario 221 Gb 129 Mb I think that the best solution would be to have it on the SSD for two reasons: the first is performance (I guess it would be a little be faster on the SSD due to the spin up time for an HDD, but I may be wrong about that) second reason is consistency. As I plan to use only the Windows 8 installation that is located on the SSD and I'm probably going to erase the system partition on the HDD to use it as a data storage device, I think that the boot partition should be on the same drive as the OS. So the question is how do I move the EFI System Partition to the SSD?

    Read the article

  • Recovery Harddisk for windows 7 (Details inside)

    - by iSumitG
    I want to create recovery media (DVD or HDD) for my Windows 7 running on my VAIO laptop. I noticed that my HDD is already having 13.51 GB partition which is labelled as "Recovery Partition" (not visible in My Computer but visible in Computer management tool in control panel). Can you please suggest me how to use this Recovery partition as a recovery media for my windows? I don't want to create DVDs as recovery media.

    Read the article

  • Windows 8.1 - Why are there multiple recovery partitions in the system?

    - by Abhiram
    DISKPART> list partition Partition ### Type Size Offset ------------- ---------------- ------- ------- Partition 1 System 500 MB 1024 KB Partition 2 OEM 40 MB 501 MB Partition 3 Reserved 128 MB 541 MB Partition 4 Recovery 490 MB 669 MB Partition 5 Primary 920 GB 1159 MB Partition 6 Recovery 350 MB 921 GB Partition 7 Recovery 9 GB 921 GB Above is the list of partitions on my system that I recently upgraded to Windows 8.1. Why are there multiple recovery partitions (4,6,7)? Shouldn't there be just one recovery partition? And what is the Reserved partition (#3) for?

    Read the article

  • Would an array of SSD drives be able to succesfully substitute the system memory?

    - by Florin Mircea
    I watched a few videos trying to answer this. This video (youtube.com/watch?v=eULFf6F5Ri8) shows a bunch of guys stacking 24 SSD's reaching a peak of around 2GBps r/w. That's under the limit of the worst DDR3 in this list (memorybenchmark.net/write_ddr3_amd.html) - that shows DDR3 memory performance varying from 2.78 to 6.55 Gb per second, but that video is over 3 years old. This video (youtube.com/watch?v=27GmBzQWwP0) shows a more optimistic situation, but for PCI-E SSD drives: 5 drives peaking at around 4Gb. And this other video shows that stacking up more than 3 SSD's doesn't realistically offer a substantial added performance. This and the fact that in all benchmarks the drives act quite poorly when dealing with small files (5k file read/write averaging from 10MB to around 30-40MBps) as opposed to how native memory handles such files, seems to indicate a definite NO to this question. Also, the write life cycle is indeed limited and the drives might wear out quickly, as kindly pointed out by paddy. However, I wanted to get more opinions on this. Would it be possible to at least obtain current memory performance with SSD's in RAID 0? And if so, in what circumstances? I am assuming using this configuration with a Windows OS that has a memory pagefile resident to that stack of SSD's, thus making it very fast to work with.

    Read the article

  • How to resize a ubuntu partition to make more room for windows

    - by Jeremy
    My laptop has Windows 7 and Ubuntu 13.10 installed alongside each other. My laptop has two 225GB hard drives. I give Ubuntu 133.65GB and I give Windows 87.76GB on the same hard drive (C). My problem now is that Windows is almost out of space but Ubuntu is only using a few GB of the 133.65GB that I gave it. I want to reduce Ubuntu's partition size and give that space to increase Windows partition size. Is that any program that can to do this?

    Read the article

  • Will my RAID0 stay intact when I move it to a new computer?

    - by Jeremy H
    My primary drive is a 250GB WD SATA drive. So, I added 2x 500GB 7,200 RPM WD SATA drives into my Windows Vista box and created a 1TB RAID0. I then formatted the the primary drive and installed Windows 7. To my pleasant surprise when I booted into Windows 7 my RAID0 was still intact and I kept trotting along the same as I did before. Now I am replacing my motherboard, processor, and RAM and plan on formatting the primary 250GB drive again and using it to boot for a new clean install of Windows 7. My question is: if I move these two SATA drives which are setup for RAID0 into the new system, install Windows 7 again, will the RAID0 remain? Edit: Software RAID. I created it within Windows. The RAID0 does NOT contain the system boot partition.

    Read the article

  • How do I fix my "My Documents"?

    - by Joshua
    I had a harddrive failure (Click of death) which is where "My Documents" was located. Now, when I try to boot Windows XP, it cannot start up. How do I fix the issue so I can boot up? Do I just need to add a new drive so that the D: can be found?

    Read the article

  • one 16K random read I/O issues 2 scsi I/O (16K and 4K) requests in linux

    - by hiroyuki
    I noticed weird issue when benchmarking random read I/O for files in linux (2.6.18). The Benchmarking program is my own program and it simply keeps reading 16KB of a file from a random offset. I traced I/O behavior at system call level and scsi level by systemtap and I noticed that one 16KB sysread issues 2 scsi I/Os as following. SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 128137183232 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 226321183 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008068009 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 226323431 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008075927 SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 21807710208 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 1889888935 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008085128 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 1889891823 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008097161 SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 139365318656 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 254092663 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008100633 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 254094879 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008111723 SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 60304424960 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 58119807 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008120469 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 58125415 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008126343 As shown above, one 16KB pread issues 2 scsi I/Os. (I traced scsi io dispatching with probe scsi.iodispatching. Please ignore values except for start-sector and size.) One scsi I/O is 16KB I/O as requested from the application and it's OK. The thing is the other 4KB I/O which I don't know why linux issues that I/O. of course, I/O performance is degraded by the weired 4KB I/O and I am having trouble. I also use fio (famous I/O benchmark tool) and noticed the same issue, so it's not from the application. Does anybody know what is going on ? Any comments or advices are appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Convert FAT32 to NTFS, risk/time?

    - by Rakward
    After a quick search I found that through a command prompt I can convert a drive from FAT32 to NTFS without losing data(see here). What I want to ask here is, how safe is this method on a 1.5 TB drive with 500 GB of data? What are the chances of this freezing up(or is there really nothin to worry about) and what is the probable time, a couple of minutes or a whole hour? Sorry if this seems like a stupid question, just want to play on the safe side here ...

    Read the article

  • SBS 2008 Script to connect - disconnect backup disk?

    - by Ed Fries
    I want to be able to leave multiple external drives connected to an SBS 2008 server and select which drive is used as a target for the backup without physically connecting/disconnecting the drive. Windows doesn't support this and my testing confirms that if 2 drives are connected there is little to no rotation between the target drives, the backup will run to the last drive it used if it is connected. Anyone have a script that will disconnect and reconnect a physical drive? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • slow disk writes between host and guest

    - by Jure1873
    I've got a ubuntu (server kernel) on a amd x4, 4gb ram, 2x seagate sata 1 tb disks for testing virtual machines and the write performance is very slow. The two disks are in a software raid1 array, one small boot ext3 partition, 10gb system partition and the rest is a xfs partition (about 980) gb for data (virtual machines). If I'm copying files from the virtual machine to the host with rsync or scp the copy frequently stalls or goes at about 1mb/s. What's wrong? I've tried disabling barriers on xfs, increased logbufs, allocsize, but it seems nothing helps. The strange thing is that await (for example during copying) for sda is usually under 100, while for sdb is around 400. Any ideas on what could be wrong / what could I do to improve this setup?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >