Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Everything posted by Augeas

  1. Augeas

    lost files

    Oh I dunno, you could always put .txt in the Filename/Path box (in advanced mode).
  2. Augeas

    lost files

    Deep scan will not find text files as they do not have a file signature thus the scan can't identify them as files. A normal scan (which runs before the deep scan) can find them (if the MFT record still exists) as it scans the MFT and the MFT holds the file name and cluster addresses of all files on the drive. If the text files aren't being picked up by the normal scan then there's little hope of retrieving them.
  3. None of us would be so fooish to wipe free space on an SSD, would we? We don't really know the mechanics of wiping free space (CC's mechanics) but we're pretty sure it allocates a large enough file to fill the disk and then deletes it. How is that file allocated? I would hope in big chunks for a start, but CC's code dates back to cro-magnon times so we can't really be sure. If it allocates initially in 1 gb chunks then the MFT record will very soon be full, and an extension record allocated. And another, and another, and then an index record, holding all the addresses of all the MFT records. The MFT record(s) for such a file could be horrendous. As the disk fills smaller allocations would be necessary, to grab the smaller spaces. More MFT mayhem. I think that the optimun conditions for a WFS would be if the free space is defragged first. Then the big file allocation would be eased, big chunks would do most of it. Small free spaces can, as I know, be missed by WFS. The process seems to allocate in minimum 32k or so chunks. P.S. Are you running WFS in Options/Settings or Drive Wiper? If in Options did you check Wipe MFT?
  4. In Advanced Mode select Options/Actions, check Restore Folder Structure. If a ? appears in a path then the folder info is missing and the path can't be completed.
  5. The MFT record for a folder contains the addresses of the MFT records of all the files in the folder. The MFT record for a file contains the address of the owning folder. When a folder is deleted NTFS removes the addresses of the files. Recuva reads the folder address in a file's MFT record to locate the owning folder, chaining back all the way to the root (if the chain is still extant). If a ? is shown as a folder it means that the backwards chain to the root cannot be completed, probably because the MFT record for that folder has been overwritten. Nobody knows whether you can recover 'this file' with Recuva or any software, we don't even know its name. Judging by what's been done to the drive I would doubt it, as I've said twice before.
  6. It appears to have located a folder. Recuva doesn't list folders explicitly, but lists files and then builds up the folder structure (if required and requested) in a chain-back process. Deleted folders, as far as I can establish, are cleared of their list of files by NTFS, so finding a deleted folder is of little use, it's just a name. You are of course free to use whatever software you want to aid any file recovery.
  7. Augeas

    Ignored Files

    By default Recuva will ignore non-deleted, system and zero-length files.
  8. The first image shows no file system, the second shows NTFS. The odds of recovering a huge file after a partition and format are about the same as England winning a test match.
  9. Simple cleaning appeared recently. I decided to use it, but I did not think that after that all accounts and the history of visited sites would be cleared. I am very upset, now I will again have to recover all logins and passwords for autocomplete. When using simple cleaning, I did not see a single indication of such consequences, it was not indicated what would be cleaned when using it. I suggest you display a warning about clearing browsers data.
  10. Where did you read that? It is nonsense, Recuva reads files only. What was the state of the external drive? Why were you recovering files? How large is it? Were you running a deep scan? You can't see what Recuva is finding until it has finished the scan. How could you see files if it was 'almost done'? Do you mean scanning or recovering?
  11. How were they erased? It's rather a lot to lose by accident.
  12. That's a different drive, or at least in a different state. The first screenshot doesn't look as if a file system has been found. I'm not really sure what you are doing.
  13. That's a folder not a file. Perhaps you haven't checked Show Files in Hidden System Directories. To reverse a partition delete and format you need a time machine. I don't know what the other sw does (or even what Recuva does), but the file names and path are all held in the MFT. I guess after a format that you're looking at the remnants of the old MFT that weren't overwritten. I should display the results as a List and sort on folder name (after doing the check and rescan as above).
  14. Recuva normal scan will list all deleted files for which a record exists in the MFT, no matter what their name or extension is, or whether they have an extension at all. Deep scan will scan for a specific list of extensions. It will not find files with an unknown, or no extension. If a normal scan can't find the file then the record in the MFT is most likely not available any more - reused or overwritten. If a deep scan can't find the file then it probably has an unknown or no extension. If it's a very large file (and I would guess it is) then it won't be easy to recover even if it is found.
  15. The deleted files will remain (if they still exist) on the drivre they were originally on. The recycler renames files sent to the recycle bin to two components named $I and $R + a set of random characters + the original file extension. Ignore the $I file, the $R is the one you want. Whether these names are kept on final deletion or reverted to the original does not seem to be clear. If you can't find anything then the files may well be gone forever. You could try a deep scan in this case, but it will not return file or folder names.
  16. It is not possible to reinstate deleted files, recovery is a copy to a safe place process. The folder structure can be recreated if required, and if it still exists. A deep scan will not find file names or folder information, nor will it find any but the first fragment of a file, so may be of limited use.
  17. Augeas

    Deleted files

    Recuva does not put any file back where it originated from. If a recovery is done then the selected files will be copied to another location for the user to reinstate as required. Shortcuts are .lnk files and should be found, but can easily be recreated. I assume you have looked in the recycler?
  18. Recuva won't fix any file problems, it copies whatever it finds in the clusters, be it good or bad data. The exif data is part of the file data and this similary won't be 'fixed' by Recuva.
  19. There's no published link that I'm aware of. The link is probably known to (let's be generous) a thousand users, against CC's claim of 6 billion downloads, which is statistially zero. Any link that's not published is unsupported, but Piriform staff have mentioned it and Piriform publishes MD5 hashes for the slim and portables. I don't know any other business that operates in such a bewildering way. This is of course not the answer to the problem raised in this thread, which is a running sore. To keep clear of this I use an old portable version. Yes, unsupported.
  20. Augeas

    Portable Recuva

    There is no limit 'on the number of files retrieved' in any version of Recuva.
  21. Well, I'm sure some of this will be down to personal opinion, but if you want to avoid 'adversely affecting my SSD' then don't run any defragger against it. My HDD dating back to 2006 which was retired early this year has never been defragged and everything was well, just fine. On an SSD it would be just finer. It's worth remembering that fragmentation is a logical construct, it doesn't exist on the disk. All a disk knows is clusters, or pages, and some are used and some aren't. Fragmentation is defined in the MFT, and that's what is used to create the Defraggler display and percentages. Whilst a HDD might suffer some slight delay in fetching disparate clusters (but I never noticed) on an SSD the overhead is as minimal as it can get. Windows 10 does defrag SSDs if certain conditions have been met, as has been discussed here recently. But this is not to reduce fragmentation in general, but to eliminate the possibility of mass extents in snapshot volumes, a very particular and specific aim. That's my opinion, there will be others. It doesn't sound to me that you have an overwhelming need to defrag your drive. Whether your loss of space is normal Defraggler action I don't know.
  22. Because these files are, as it states, not deleted. You can't delete a live file with Recuva. That's CC's job.
  23. This thread goes back to the big bang, and you don't have the same problem. Please stick to your original thread.
  24. Simply reading a 1 tb disk (at around 150 mb a sec) should take about two hours, if my maths is correct. Recuva does rather more, it runs a normal scan first (which should be a few minutes only) and during the deep scan has to correlate the used (live) clusters with the unused, compare the first section of each cluster with a table of known file headers, build up a list in memory of what valid files it has found, and do all the other things I can't think of at the moment or just don't know about. In any event three days is silly. I doubt if anything good will come if Recuva ever finishes, but what it's doing heaven only knows. I guess it's an HDD, USB?
  • Create New...