Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Redesigns chkdsk For Windows 8, Improves NTFS Health Model

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the strict-diet-and-lots-of-exercise dept.

Microsoft 219

MojoKid writes "Microsoft can't do anything to magically make hard drives stop failing when parts go bad, but Redmond is rolling out a new NTFS health model for Windows 8 with a redesigned chkdsk tool for disk corruption detection and fixing. In past versions of the chkdsk and NTFS health model, the file system volume was either deemed healthy or not healthy. In Windows 8, Microsoft is changing things up. Rather than hours of downtime, Windows 8 splits the process into phases that include 'Detect Corruption,' 'Online Self-Healing,' 'Online Verification,' 'Online Identification & Logging,' and 'Precise & Rapid Correction.'"

cancel ×

219 comments

No more hours of downtime (0, Troll)

AlienIntelligence (1184493) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981033)

Unless you use 'Precise & Rapid Correction.'

-AI

Re:No more hours of downtime (1, Interesting)

objective-c (2637831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981091)

It seems like Microsoft is really going out of it's way to innovate in Windows 8. I just hope both Apple and Linux developers would add something similar, as it's hard drive failure can lead to huge problems. Yes, you can use RAID or something, but that will bring costs significantly up. It's better to see these things before failure actually happens.

Re:No more hours of downtime (0, Flamebait)

allaunjsilverfox2 (882195) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981101)

It seems like Microsoft is really going out of it's way to innovate in Windows 8. I just hope both Apple and Linux developers would add something similar, as it's hard drive failure can lead to huge problems. Yes, you can use RAID or something, but that will bring costs significantly up. It's better to see these things before failure actually happens.

Rather than take sane precautions with your data such as RAID and/or backing up your information, you want a warning 1 minute before your drive fails?

Re:No more hours of downtime (5, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981123)

sane precautions with your data such as RAID and/or backing up your information

RAID and backing up should never be considered an "OR".
 
Repeat after me .. "RAID is not a backup strategy".

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981299)

I've always wondered about this, and I can see it for RAID 5 (also, I've seen RAID 5 setups fail irrecoverably), but what about RAID 1, where you're just mirroring. Wouldn't that essentially be the same as backing up to a different hard drive?

Re:No more hours of downtime (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981313)

Right up until your primary gets some corruption and proceeds to mirror it to the other.

Re:No more hours of downtime (0, Offtopic)

Lothsahn (221388) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981363)

I use RAID 1 for backups all the time. I shutdown the system, pull a drive, swap it out, and then restart the system. While system is up, replace second drive with a new drive and reimage over.

Total downtime: 5 minutes or so. Degraded performance for a few hours during rebuild.

Basically, if you use RAID 1 like tapes, where each HD is a tape, it can be an extremely economical and reliable way to backup data. You know your data's being backed up because you're actually running off that data. You can't have a situation where the tape drive fails to write data and then suddenly when you have a disaster, you find out that you have 6 months of blank tapes (I've had that happen).

At $100 per tape (actually HD+case), it's very cheap per 2TB of backups.

You should be fired. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981637)

Seriously. Your strategy puts at risk all the writes during that rebuild process.

Re:No more hours of downtime (3, Insightful)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981673)

That only "backs up" against drive failure. What happens if something gets deleted? What happens if a process goes mad and scribbles all over something important? What if someone breaks in?

Re:No more hours of downtime (3, Insightful)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981341)

Just delete an important file or directory on a RAID1 and see how much that "backup" protected you. Or install a virus. Or have data corruption on a disk.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981425)

you can back up a virus with a non RAID 1 back up system.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981683)

And if you are smart and have previous backups and/or incrementals, you can get what you need without bringing the virus along for the fun.

Re:No more hours of downtime (2)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981345)

No.

What happens if, say, you get a virus, or your app goes haywire, and The Critical Irreplaceable File gets corrupted or deleted?

RAID protects from hardware failures. It does nothing against software or human errors. And given my history with hardware, software and people, I'd say the first is generally the most reliable.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981351)

Not really:

a) RAID stores everything and only one version, backup is usually selective and versioned
b) backup is independent from the main storage. Its storage rests most of the time and it should be in several places - in case of fire or flood, for example. RAID is always spending its working resource and, more true for some schemes than other, has similar usage patterns across disks. If one sector on one disk in RAID1 failed, it might mean that this sector is often accessed and will soon fail on other disk.

RAID is tactical, backup is strategical. RAID1 gives you added read performance with negligible write performance loss and a chance to continue operations without breaking for repairs. Backup lets you repair everything when shit hits the fan.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981375)

Wouldn't that essentially be the same as backing up to a different hard drive?

RAID protects against hardware malfunctions, but not user malfunctions. Backups protects against both.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981531)

Delete an important file. Then ask that question again.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981781)

I've always wondered about this, and I can see it for RAID 5 (also, I've seen RAID 5 setups fail irrecoverably), but what about RAID 1, where you're just mirroring. Wouldn't that essentially be the same as backing up to a different hard drive?

Drives don't need to fail for a backup to be needed. You might think you are formatting an SD card and end up formatting an essential partition. You could do like I did once while setting up an OS on a VM and told it format the wrong drive. Say what you will about Linux, but it continued to run even though the root partition had been reformatted out from underneath it. Or, it might be something as simple as someone goes in and deletes your LDF files trying to save hard drive space. It might even be a software issue that trashes your necessary files or partitions. It could be a virus...

No matter what causes the problem, in a RAID setup, the error or mistake will be copied to all of your "backup" drives. If you don't have an offline backup, you are screwed.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

objective-c (2637831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981173)

RAID isn't always an option, especially on laptops. I do take precautions with my data like online backing up but because of small amount of available bandwidth, I only do this for most important files. That still doesn't mean I don't care about the other files - I do, but just less so. Nevertheless they can be important.

Re:No more hours of downtime (4, Funny)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981321)

It seems like Microsoft is really going out of it's way to innovate in Windows 8. I just hope both Apple and Linux developers would add something similar, as it's hard drive failure can lead to huge problems. Yes, you can use RAID or something, but that will bring costs significantly up. It's better to see these things before failure actually happens.

Rather than take sane precautions with your data such as RAID and/or backing up your information, you want a warning 1 minute before your drive fails?

1 minute should be more than enough for anybody.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981663)

Can I have both? Can I have a drive that, on that one minute warning, immediately flushes it's cache and goes offline?

It would make recovery after replacement much smoother. Clone and go, no worries about incomplete writes etc.

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

slartibartfastatp (613727) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981131)

I predict that, sometime in the future, some of your storage device will fail.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981199)

sometime in the future, some of your storage device will fail

SSD? Sure. NTFS has such a vibrant disk activity life, it is amazing. I mean, how is it even possible to constantly write something to the drive, like every second, all the time, even during idle. There is a huge gap for improvement. The current NTFS behaviour can only be called a calamity.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

objective-c (2637831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981239)

Never heard about virtual memory?

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981387)

Ever wonder why it's *always* turned on?

I just set up 2 servers that had 128GB RAM, running MS Server 2008 Enterprise. Guess what the boot drives had? Yep, a 128GB swap file.

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981477)

You weren't planning on hibernating a server? Why not? Made sense to somebody...

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981605)

I don't think the swap lives in hiberfile.sys
That's just an educated guess though.

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981933)

Do you hibernate to a page file?

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

doshell (757915) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981243)

I wonder if that is really NTFS's problem. There is no reason for a filesystem (even a poorly designed one) to be writing sectors to disk all the time unless running programs request the OS to do so. The most likely culprits are poorly-designed Windows applications that write to disk all the time.

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981281)

Or the virtual memory swapping pages out "just in case", or any of the speedup features Windows has etc etc etc.

Even when "idle", the OS is still doing things behind the scenes. Just because you aren't aware of them doesn't mean they don't happen.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981717)

"Speedup" features that waste time writing stuff to disk are very poorly named....

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981331)

There is the NTFS logging and other stuff like the indexing that is written all the time... you read/write something and bang, NTFS writes a log about it, tries to auto defragment it, makes a failsave copy, indexes it, writes to the register, to the system log and who knows where about it... happily wearing my SSD in the process.

Re:No more hours of downtime (2)

Jerome H (990344) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981407)

Defrag and indexing is automatically disabled on a SSD

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981699)

Windows, since XP, defragments the filesystem when idle.

You can turn this off via TweakUI for XP, I know this. Not sure how to do so on Vista/7.

Re:No more hours of downtime (0)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981159)

shillolololololololololool

Re:No more hours of downtime (2)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981343)

I don't think it is. I think it's another of those far-too-obvious ones like "googlewatch" and "apple-fan" which I think have just been set up to troll.

If it's being paid for (as we;re meant to believe has been going on for ages) then the subtlety level has dropped an order of magnitude.

Also, the names of the accounts are all highly suspect - this one just so happens to be named after the programming language used in OS X and iOS? Come on!

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981167)

It seems like Microsoft is really going out of it's way to innovate in Windows 8. I just hope both Apple and Linux developers would add something similar, as it's hard drive failure can lead to huge problems. Yes, you can use RAID or something, but that will bring costs significantly up. It's better to see these things before failure actually happens.

Well, it's nice to see NTFS catching up to features in ZFS. Which is available for Solaris (and OpenSolaris, Illumos, OpenIndiana), FreeBSD, and NetBSD. Not sure of ZFS's status with Linux via ZFS-FUSE or that third-party kernel module that is in development. Linux also has Btrfs in development.

For the Mac OS, Apple was originally looking into ZFS, but dropped it supposedly due to licensing issues. There is also http://tenscomplement.com/our-products for ZFS storage solutions for the Mac.

Apple does have http://www.nobius.org/~dbg/ Dominic Giampaolo, the Be File System rockstar, and there have been a lot of rumors about future filesystem development to meet the goals they originally intended to have with ZFS.

Re:No more hours of downtime (2, Interesting)

haruchai (17472) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981225)

You must spend more time actually working with non-Windows systems. Multiple filesystems, most free, some commercial have been doing these sorts of things, and more for YEARS.

Re:No more hours of downtime (-1, Troll)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981293)

You should spend more time actually doing low level programming and thinking, instead of trumpeting linux. There is no file system that does what you suggest, nor is this article about a new file system that does what you suggest. Programs and OS services are not file systems.

So no, not "multiple file systems" as you fanclaim. The truth is "no file systems in the past, present, or future." If you dont understand this, then dont comment on threads like this. That tiny bit of fact that you have stored away somewhere doesnt support your statements... because you really have no idea what you are talking about. Tiny little facts does not equal understanding.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981367)

Yeah, like zfs or btrfs with checksumming of all [meta]data and built-in RAID.

Re:No more hours of downtime (2)

haruchai (17472) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981821)

Kindly have your own reading comprehension checked.

Non-Windows does NOT automatically and exclusively mean Linux.

Also, once that reactionary rash of yours stops flaring up, go investigate what ZFS and its tools, such as scrub, can do for people who care about data integrity.

Also, in your detailed reading of the article, did you note, for example, "NTFS detects", "NTFS attempts", "NTFS validates", "healing feature built into NTFS",
"introduced a new file system (emphasis added) ReFS"

Here, have another look: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/09/redesigning-chkdsk-and-the-new-ntfs-health-model.aspx [msdn.com]

It seems the lighting under your troll bridge is, well, a bit dim.

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

Drinking Bleach (975757) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981329)

I just hope both Apple and Linux developers would add something similar

You mean like btrfs? (which has many additional advantages that Microsoft can't simply "add" to NTFS without replacing it entirely; it's like how ext4 is a good improvement on the old filesystem design, but overall it's limited in very fundamental ways. NTFS is similar; it needs to be thrown out entirely)

Re:No more hours of downtime (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981355)

It seems like Microsoft is really going out of it's way to innovate in Windows 8.

No Windows 8 is Microsoft implementing a lot of things that Linux/BSD already have. This would include an attempt to force a first gen "Duel OS" onto its users.

Duel OS? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981481)

En garde!!!

One burning question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981047)

Will I need a quad core minimum to run this?

Re:One burning question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981915)

No, sir! It means you get to have a quad core.

Or, as some folks may say (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981079)

1. Your data has disappeared (detect corruption).
2. Hit self on head with brick because your data wasn't backed up (online self-healing)
3. Hit self on head again to see if your data has reappeared (online verification)
4. Identify brick by matching to lumps on head (online identification and logging)
5. Give brick to neighbor's kid to hit you on head with again (precise and rapid correction)

New options? (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981093)

Why is Online Self Healing different and from "Make the damn FS work properly"?

WTF FS is that has problems that can be fixed online?

Re:New options? (4, Informative)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981145)

"Online" as in "don't dismount the disk while we fix it, so you can continue to use it".

Re:New options? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981213)

In other words big ass journals and lots of buffering. Sounds like a Microsoft solution; just give us more RAM and drive space.

Re:New options? (3, Insightful)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981725)

RAM is cheap. Why not use it?

Re:New options? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981163)

Maybe it's sending a query "hey, do you have a file named like this?" to torrent sites, downloading the missing chunks and pretends that it was a very sophisticated file-recovery method patented by Microsoft.

Re:New options? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981245)

That option has already been patented. There's a big law suit as to whether or not Apt-get counts as prior art.

Re:New options? (2)

Sc4Freak (1479423) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981187)

Er, because any filesystem can have nonfatal minor errors? For example a filesystem that uses a bitmap to track free space (like NTFS does) can have that bitmap corrupted by bad sectors or whatever. Things like that are sufficiently simple that you can attempt a repair while the volume is online, without major risk of failure.

Two Obvious Reasons Would Be: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981365)

Why is Online Self Healing different and from "Make the damn FS work properly"?

"Online Self Healing" : copyrightable

"Make the damn FS work properly" : probably not copyrightable; and

"Online Self Healing" : something to market to the technically naive (think CTO) - easy to SELL fix to the gullible as a FEATURE for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

"Make the damn FS work properly" : sounds a tad like criticism of one of the scads of obvious weaknesses of the past couple of decades - hard to SELL fix as a FEATURE even to the technically naive

Improves chkdsk? Heh. (1, Interesting)

macraig (621737) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981097)

Considering that the current chkdsk is actually capable of causing massive logical damage [slashdot.org] , Microsoft has a LONG way to go to make it function as intended.

Re:Improves chkdsk? Heh. (1)

Twinbee (767046) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981265)

Ah, glad to see some of the spirit and philosophy of DiskDoctor has made it over to Windows. I wonder if that 'repair' utility actually ever worked for anyone ever.

Re:Improves chkdsk? Heh. (3, Interesting)

sco08y (615665) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981535)

Considering that the current chkdsk is actually capable of causing massive logical damage [slashdot.org] , Microsoft has a LONG way to go to make it function as intended.

You mean it's suspected of causing additional damage in a couple of comments.

It's very possible that there are long standing bugs. It's also possible that it just tried very hard on a hopelessly borked drive and failed.

source leaked!!! (5, Funny)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981175)

here the highlight.

if disk.mbr.has_grub
    for part in disc.partitions
          if part.type.not_ours
              chair.throw() # dammit... let's do something about it
              part.raw_write(offset=random(1,part.size),data=random(1,255)) # voila'
          end if
      end for
end if

Re:source leaked!!! (0)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981359)

Hee hee. If there's grub in the MBR it runs first.
Gotta write some code defending against this...

Re:source leaked!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981809)

If the code is running it has already defeated grub, probably via the user choosing "Windooze" out of the grub menu.

Re:source leaked!!! (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981797)

Wait.. why would low level Microsoft utilities be written in vimscript?

Online (1)

denshao2 (1515775) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981179)

I'm glad that this does not mean over the internet.

Re:Online (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981737)

I wouldn't be so sure about that...

Marketing dept. (4, Funny)

Citizen of Earth (569446) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981181)

phases that include 'Detect Corruption,'

Given the other phase names, I surprised the marketing department didn't call this "Detect Awesomeness!".

Re:Marketing dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981337)

I remember back in the '90s, MS promoted a new version of Windows by observing that the old one that everyone was still using was "lacking in robustness."

How about my USB devices? (0)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981203)

So...how about my USB devices? Will Microsoft stop labeling them as 'dirty', despite the fact that FAT32 devices don't need to be 'detached' in the same way as NTFS filesystems? A FAT USB drive (or Android phone) doesn't need to be 'safely removed'. You can just yank the thing and it's fine (as long as it's finished its r/w operations). These days, Windows prompts me to chkdsk my damn USB drive/Android phone every time I plug it in. I looked in to disabling it, and it

Re:How about my USB devices? (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981307)

A FAT USB drive (or Android phone) doesn't need to be 'safely removed'. You can just yank the thing and it's fine (as long as it's finished its r/w operations).

These two statements are mutually exclusive. The translation of your post, once only the facts remain, is "I hate windows." Why didnt you just say that you hate windows?

Re:How about my USB devices? (2)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981499)

A FAT USB drive (or Android phone) doesn't need to be 'safely removed'. You can just yank the thing and it's fine (as long as it's finished its r/w operations).

I thought making sure that all read/write operations have finished was the point of "safely remove".

Re:How about my USB devices? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981545)

I looked in to disabling it, and it

See, truncated data. That's what happens when you remove without unmounting.

No blinking light (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981739)

You can just yank the thing and it's fine

This is true if you've set the drive's caching policy to "optimize for quick removal" rather than "optimize for performance". (Names are from memory and may not be exact.) "Optimize for quick removal", which Windows turns on automatically for removable media drives, syncs the file system continuously.

(as long as it's finished its r/w operations).

The trouble is figuring out when this has happened, as a lot of USB mass storage devices don't have a blinking access light. Only one of my USB flash drives has one, and my Android device does not. As maxwell demon pointed, out, the "safely remove" on a removable drive is useful for making sure that all writes have completed.

v8 chkdsk on windows 7? (3, Interesting)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981215)

chkdsk is a standalone app. Can I use v8 on my v7 OS?

Re:v8 chkdsk on windows 7? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981401)

Part of what the team has been doing since Windows 7 is to refactor large monolithic DLLs (like kernel32 and advapi) into smaller DLLs that are layered more properly and quicker to load (due to reduced size). Windows 8 continues this work. This is part of the whole "minwin" effort that lots of people in the (external to MS) rumor mill got excited about a few years back. (At least minwin is what they used to call it. Core system is another term used later.)

As a result of this work, in Win7 and Win8, most binaries you find in system32 depend on newfangled DLLs not present in a downlevel system and will thus not load on an older version of the OS. So I doubt it. (Not to mention that this new thing in particular, since it's about modifying online filesystems, might depend on new ioctls or other hooks in ntfs.sys or maybe some other driver - though I can't say I know that for sure.)

-Former Windows dev.

Re:v8 chkdsk on windows 7? (1, Funny)

costing (748101) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981409)

Sure, you can even run it under Wine and do an online check of your / . It's amazingly fast in fixing your disk, much more so than even rm -rf. Then you can upgrade your Wine to a bottle and wonder wth you just did.

Re:v8 chkdsk on windows 7? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981461)

Don't forget the NTFS storage driver, it's probably been upgraded to handle online repairs. The driver is part of the OS.

Re:v8 chkdsk on windows 7? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981751)

In the past it has been possible to run newer versions of chkdsk on older versions of the filesystem, just not on the older version of the OS. Chkdsk for Windows 7 requires the NTFS driver from Windows 7 so won't work on XP, but you can boot a Windows 7 install disc and run chkdsk on an XP partition.

This... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981233)

...sounds like M$ is copying spinrite.

Next Gen File system (4, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981247)

I was curious as to why MS is continuing on with NTFS, surely there must be something newer coming out of their R&D labs. So a quick google turned up this from the same blog, but earlier this year: building the next generation file system for windows refs [msdn.com]

Re:Next Gen File system (4, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981259)

In fact the whole blog is interesting Building Windows 8 [msdn.com]

Re:Next Gen File system (2)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981273)

surely there must be something newer coming out of their R&D labs.

Yes, they have something newer that they will release with GNU Hurd, when it comes out . . .

Re:Next Gen File system (1)

Trepidity (597) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981283)

I believe ReFS is only going to be included in the Server version of Windows 8, not the regular one, which will stick with NTFS.

Re:Next Gen File system (1)

Elbart (1233584) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981373)

A filesystem with all these features [msdn.com] missing must be good, right?
Right?

Re:Next Gen File system (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981381)

surely there must be something newer coming out of their R&D labs

You want something new out of MS labs on your computer?

Re:Next Gen File system (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981449)

Actually, as you read through those papers, you'll see these are not just NTFS tools being upgraded with every OS release, the NTFS itself is being changed to accomodate those new features.

So "NTFS" is not a specific FS design or version - it's a common name, but the internals are being constantly upgraded.

But overall - yes, they are working on a new FS. It was even announced long time back that "Longhorn" / Vista would have a transactional FS.

Lets activate Windows! (1, Flamebait)

ciantic (626550) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981257)

Ah, finally, all those Online-something goodies for chkdsk. I've always wanted to have Windows Activation Wizard popping up before my chkdsk session, just in case I was in doubt was my copy legitimate. (It is btw)

Re:Lets activate Windows! (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981745)

Ah, finally, all those Online-something goodies for chkdsk. I've always wanted to have Windows Activation Wizard popping up before my chkdsk session, just in case I was in doubt was my copy legitimate. (It is btw)

I assume they meant "online" as in "in the background while the rest of the system is operational", rather than "connected to the Internet and phoning home to Microsoft", but I could be wrong.

I defend against disk corruption with HOSTS files (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981271)

DO THE FOLLOWING -- obtain a good reputable solid HOSTS file, like mvps' -> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org]

* DONE!

(Yes, it's THAT simple vs. hosts-domain based threats which ARE THE MAJORITY OF THEM OUT THERE (because hosts-domain names are recyclable unlike IP addresses)... &, it works - you CAN'T be burned if you can't go into the malware kitchen!) No more malware, no disk corruption!

This concept & technique is VERY simple to understand, as far as how to install a custom HOSTS file, how to get data to populate it (& if need be? An Access import & "SELECT * DISTINCT FROM (tablename) ORDER BY ASC" type query & export can do the deduplication/normalization end even).

E.G.-> I've taught it to people who have NO CLUE in computing in fact, & they took to it like ducks to water - especially custom editing their custom HOSTS file with text editors once they understand what speeds them up (hardcodes) & secures them + how, by blocking out bogus sites/servers!

(And? Heck - They ought to like it & take to them fast! Especially considering a custom HOSTS file acts as a security layer AND more-or-less, an "online turbocharger" for speed too, for free! You already own one anyhow, with any OS that uses a BSD based IP stack (which IS most))...

P.S.=> Of course, your HOSTS file will need to have the domain/hosts name of the C&C servers, & that you have to obtain for this to work vs. threats like bogus servers &/or maliciously scripted sites. Here's some good sources for that above & beyond mvps.org (I noted them above):

http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download [hosts-file.net]
http://www.malwaredomainlist.com/hostslist/hosts.txt [malwaredomainlist.com]
http://mirror1.malwaredomains.com/files/ [malwaredomains.com] (justdomains here)
http://pgl.yoyo.org/as/serverlist.php?hostformat=hosts&showintro=1&mimetype=plaintext [yoyo.org]
http://sysctl.org/cameleon/hosts [sysctl.org]
http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ [someonewhocares.org]
http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html [hostsfile.org]
http://hostsfile.mine.nu/downloads/ [hostsfile.mine.nu]
https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=lastupdated [abuse.ch]
https://spyeyetracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=lastupdated [abuse.ch]
http://www.malwareurl.com/ [malwareurl.com]
http://www.safer-networking.org/en/download/ [safer-networking.org] (updater for Spybot "Search & Destroy" & it fortifies HOSTS files)

Those are some of my regular sources that are reputable & reliable for custom HOSTS file data populations vs. known threats online - I consolidate them here via programs I wrote that normalize/deduplicate repeated entries, sort/alphabetize the results, & change from larger + slower 127.0.0.1 (longer & loopback ops happen here) to the faster & smaller 0.0.0.0 (or even 0 on Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003): Enjoy!

... apk

Re:I defend against disk corruption with HOSTS fil (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981497)

... ... ...

I don't know if this is the real APK or not. Wow.

I wonder what entries he adds or removes from his hosts file when his car doesn't start.

Excited...in a subdued sort of way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981275)

While I'm not a Microsoft fanboy by any means, I do recognize that a majority of companies around the world still utilize a variety Microsoft OSes, and they tend to push ideas that, while usually not totally original, become accepted by the mainstream. Frankly Microsoft's programming has gotten a lot more stream-lined and user friendly of late, particularly for IT in small companies(not to say that it's perfect...). I am interested to see how Server 8, Azure, Office 15, Windows 8, and even Windows Phone 8 and Xbox 360 mesh. I want to see what tools become truly effective and meaningful where data transfer and preservation is concerned (i.e. small things like Disk Pooling and chkdsk to system-wide backup routines etc.). At home, I would love to back-up vital files on the unused 150GB on my Xbox 360 with the click of a button, without having to buy yet another portable drive. Even pooling drive space between my PC, 360, and Windows Phone (no, I don't have a Windows Phone) would be awesome. Just little things that true integration between systems could make possible in the near future are kind of nice to consider.

Of course, all of this is already possible in some form or another, but I'm talking functionality built into these multiple systems at retail.

What about hyperterm? (1, Insightful)

stevegee58 (1179505) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981315)

It still hangs at 100% CPU for no apparent reason even after 20 years.

refs (1)

StuffMaster (412029) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981347)

This is good news! I still swear by running chkdsk /f after power loss or hard reset, even with Windows 7...I've had a few cases where there was some corruption and Windows didn't give a warning about it.

Also, it's about time NTFS got upgraded. Extents, checksums, etc. are no longer new and unnecessary.

Re:refs (1)

Elbart (1233584) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981389)

ReFS won't be in Windows 8.

Re:refs (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981443)

and you can't boot from it or
Q) Can ReFS be used on removable media or drives?

No, this is not implemented or supported.

Re:refs (1)

whoever57 (658626) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981583)

ReFS won't be in Windows 8.

ReFS is the filesystem of the future -- and always will be?
ReFS will be coming in the next +1 version of Windows, and always will be?

For the Professional Edition (1)

Provocateur (133110) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981371)

The Professional Edition will include a DVD of Daily Affirmation with Stuart Smalley, in case the user blames himself for the computer's failure during stressful times.

mod 3oWn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981447)

we all know, you loved that Is perhaps the goodwill

how quaint (0)

khipu (2511498) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981471)

Linux runs so reliably with ext4, package management, and all that that things like "chkdsk" and "self-healing" sound oddly quaint and old-fashioned.

Re:how quaint (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981685)

It's called fsck, not chkdsk.
And the fact that ext4 doesn't support online fsck is a major annoyance for a lot of sysadmins.

It's not about running well or not, it's about the system being shut down in a middle of a write operation.

btrfs can do online fsck, and I'm looking forward to it just for that.

Re:how quaint (1)

jpmorgan (517966) | more than 2 years ago | (#39981701)

Yeah. e4fsck is a much more modern name.

Christ.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39981827)

Microsoft can't do anything to magically make hard drives stop failing when parts go bad

Yes, we know. Since when did /. become so patronising?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...