Jump to content

Willy2

Experienced Members
  • Posts

    1,829
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Willy2

  1. - The main program is started by Task Scheduler every 15 minutes. After "Cleaning" the memory it automatically closes. You can change the timing in Task Scheduler.

    - Run "mini_monitor.exe". In that program you make changes about how the program behaves. make a shortcut to that file and place it on the desktop.

  2. Here the confusion has only grown. I understand some things in your explanation and some other things are still shrouded in confusion.

    Do you have some weblinks that provide good information about what the structure is of the MFT and how the "Index ifles" (see a previous reply of mine in this thread) fit in the overall "MFT picture" ? You have layed out a number of dots. But I fail to see how all those dots (e.g. index files) connect with each other.

    "Fiddling around" with those index records also has produced some interesting insights.

    (Remember what my signature is for each post here on this forum. (Something with "A discussion ....... "))

  3. - The latest version of OEC PRO v3.2 now supports MAPI.

    MAPI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAPI

    Still have to find GOOD information on what MAPI is all about. Has anyone some good suggestions where to find that info ?

    - OEC now supports some 19 languages. But users who want to help to translate the program into additional languages are still very welcome to do so. Send an email to the developers of OEC.

  4. - Agree. The user can't "defrag" the memory. Because memory usage is fragmented by design and memory management doesn't enable the user to manipulating the usage of the memory. Other than with a number of APIs available in Windows.

  5. Quote:

    "A directory is a record, or number of records, in the MFT. NTFS will reduce the size of the directory on file deletion, shuffling the live entries up to overwrite the deleted entry. There are no references to deleted files in an NTFS directory. The MFT is heavily protected and any writes to it with, for instance, a hex editor are backed out in seconds. There is no concept of a 'vacant' directory entry."

    No, when a file is deleted then NTFS doesn't reduce the size of the directory & doesn't overwrite the deleted entry & doesn't shuffle all live entries up. If that was the case then RECUVA wouldn't be able to find & recover those "deleted files", would it ?

    It wouldn't make sense either in another way. Imagine a (VERY) large MFT with A LOT OF entries. When I delete one file that has an entry at the very beginning of the MFT, then it would take NTFS A LOT OF / way too much time to "shuffle all live entries" to overwrite only one deleted entry. And that undermines all your 3 other replies as well.

    In other words: There are entries that are "vacant" (or as Microsoft puts it: "unallocated").

  6. - Fragmented directory files shown in Defraggler: See the picture inside the red rectangle.

    - Options for "unrecoverable files": Agree. The program indeed still needs to analyze the entire drive. But including the "unrecoverable" and other "less recoverable" files in the file list overwhelms & confuses the user (too much).

    Defraggler3.png

  7. - I my previous post I mentioned the words "Windows System Restore". That brings me to another suggestion: Defragment the files in the folder "c;\system volume information" upon start up as well. There are the files of the System Restore Points located. These files can't be moved by DF in Win 7 and newer. But perhaps it's possible to defragment those files upon start-up (like other important system files like pagefile.sys, hiberfil.sys, etc.).

  8. - And here is a bug that need to be fixed in the next version of RECUVA:

    - When RECUVA is busy analyzing drives then something very odd shows up. The program shows a ridiculous high %  and a very high negative %. Very, very odd. See the 2 pictures attached.

    - Question: Do compressed files make these ridiculous high % show up in the program ? Like they do in CCleaner ?

    Recuva.png

    RECUVA-3.png

  9. - Add an option/ options to hide all files that are "Unrecoverable" / "Poorly recoverable" / etc. Present these options to the user before RECUVA analyzes a drive.

    - Add one or more options to overwrite entries in a directory file. Or include "overwrite directory file entries" program code in the "overwrite selected file(s)" subroutines that are already available/used in the current version. As far as I know it's impossible to directly write to/ erase information from the Master File Table (MFT). That's why the program must overwrite entries in the directory files  itself. Perhaps it's possible to overwrite a directory entry with e.g. zeros (or another character) that would signal to the NTFS that such a directory entry is "vacant / empty" ?

    - The developers of Recuva could take this one step further. Perhaps it's possible to even reduce the size of a directory file itself. So, if a directory file contains say 100 entries of which say 30 refer to files that don't exist anymore or are "securely overwritten" then perhaps it's possible to reduce the size of that directory file to the remaining 70 entries.

    The reduction of the size of the directory file could happen under a separate option or included in the "Securely overwrite files" subroutines.

    - Then the "Securely overwrite files" program code could contain the following things/subroutines :

    1)) Securely overwrite files

    2)) Overwrite "empty" directory file entries.

    3)) Reduce the size of directory files

    - In the past I had a program called "Clean Disk Security" ( http://www.theabsolute.net/sware/clndisk.html CDS) that was able to reduce the amount of directory entries in a directory file. Several times in the past I ran RECUVA before and after running CDS. As a result of running CDS I noticed that the amount of e.g. "unrecoverable files" (as reported by Recuva) shrank (very) dramatically. Unfortunately I don't have that version (v7.xx) of that program (CDS) anymore.

  10. - It's a bit more complicated. When I turned on the Hibernation feature and the Operating System created "Hyberfil.sys" I also had A LOT OF files that were created by Windows' System Restore. But Defraggler isn't able to defragment "Hyberfil.sys". Otherwise this file wouldn't be fragmented at all of have had a (much) lower amount of fragments.

  11. - "Disable Defragmentation of an SSD" ??? I disagree. Because when an SSD has a (very) high fragmentation rate then that on its own will/can slow down an SSD. This is the result of the special technology of how an SSD writes data to disk.

    See this info:

    https://pureinfotech.com/why-solid-state-drive-ssd-performance-slows-down/

    But I would limit the / a full defragmentation of an SSD to say once in 3 or 6 months.

  12. - Another suggestion for the next version of DF:

    The user is able to decrease & increase the size of the drive map in DF (between the 2 red lines in the picture below). One way to do that is to place the mouse cursor on the black line in the GUI (see the picture below) of DF and drag that line higher or lower with the computer mouse.

    However, the black line doesn't show up in the GUI of DF. I drew that line in the picture. That means that the user has to make a guess where the mouse cursor must be placed. The user must make a guess what the "sensitive area" is where the standard mouse cursor changes into - what I would call - 2 connected arrow heads. (I tried to make a screenshot but to no avail)

    Suggestion:

     Add that black line to the GUI of DF. Or add some other graphic line / colored area / graphic feature that makes it more clear to the user where the user must place the mouse cursor in order to increase/decrease the size of the file map.

     

    Defraggler2.png

  13. I noticed that the developers of Defraggler (DF) are planning a new version of the program. Well, then they only have to read this thread to see all the things that can be improved/fixed. And as they can see, I have come across A LOT OF things that can be fixed and improved.

    Some of the bugs in this thread are clear and obvious bugs that need to be fixed and can be (easily (??)) fixed. But other bugs don't show a reliable pattern of when and where these bugs are occurring. In those cases I think this "irregular" behaviour can be fixed by, what I would call, "better protecting the internal DF variables" and/or improving the memorymanagement.

    If I was asked to give a list of the fixes/improvements that have for me the highest priority then it would look like this:

    1) Fix the multiple issues/bugs in the "Move files to end of drive" options which prevents the program from properly moving the all right files. See the 2 red arrows in the 1st picture.
    2) Improve the "move to the end of drive" subroutines. In the 2nd picture I have an example. Here DF moved a number of files (blue boxes + red arrows) to the end of the drive. But after moving the files there are still (large) gaps (black line & black arrow).
    3) Improve the "display blocks" routines. When I click on every empty box between 2 groups of blue boxes (above the black line) then DF reported that there were still some 4 or 5 files in that gap (above black line) but not all these files showed up in the file map between the files.
    4) (Sharply) Reduce the time the program needs to stop. The user can decide to interrupt the program when the program is performing some operation (e.g. moving files to the end of a drive). But then it can take a LONG LONG time (up to 5 (10 ??) minutes !!) before the DF program code has really finished "stopping". The sign that DF is still (very) "busy" doing something mysterious, is the (very) high CPU as shown in Task Manager. And when I am really fed up, I simply use Task Manager to abort the DF process.

    Screenshot_25.png

    Defraggler1.png

  14. - A new version of OE Classic has been released. From the OEC Facebook page ( https://www.facebook.com/oeclassic ) :

    At last, the latest update of OE Classic - v3.2, 2021-04-06, https://www.oeclassic.com/ - brings you long awaited features (asked by many users!):

    New features:

    • [2021-03-14] Set as default program for "mailto:" links and "Email Link" functionality in some web browsers (which browsers ???)

    • [2021-04-06] Set as default program for opening external .EML files (also "Open with" shell menu)

    The above 2 features allow you to set OE Classic as "default" mail program for opening "mailto:" links (when clicked in web browser) and for opening .EML files which you may have saved on your disk drive as files.

  15. - To be honest: this is the first time I used the program for "recovering" a (fairly large) bunch of (large) files.

    - Luckily those files were on an non-system drive. I use that drive to backup all the files I have on my main (system) drive.And I was keenly aware that writing to that disk would risk overwriting those files that needed to be recovered. So, I didn't write/copy any files to that drive before "recovering" those "lost" files. And that's - of course - the best way to approach this "recovery" problem.

    - Yes, after giving it some hours of thought, I figured out what the limitations are of "recovering" those files with RECUVA.

     

     

  16. First, let me state that I used the program yesterday for the first time in say 4 or 5 years.

    I needed to recover a number of files I accidently deleted. I was able to succesfully recover those files.

    After that I started fiddling with the program. Tried to recover a number of other files that supposedly were not overwritten by other files. But when I tried to play those files (these were *.mp4 & *.flv files) it turned out out that the content of the files was different from what the title was promising. And some files, that were supposedly "recoverable" generated an error. (e.g. "General Error") And this happened with all 3 mediaplayers I have installed (and regularly use).

    When the program was recovering those files, it copied/recoverd those files from the D drive (external) drive and put those files onto my main drive (C). 

    That's where the prgram code needs to be improved in a future version. Perhaps other programs are "interfering" with RECUVA ?? Perhaps the program needs to better "protect its internal variables" ?

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.