Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

Sector size cluster muck accessing 1 of 2 WD10EZEX 1TB AF NTFS disk under two different interfaces (incl a USB-SATA bridge in the mix)

bridge af sector size ntfs wd10ezex interface switch.cmd usb-sata usb to sata

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 28 May 2016 - 11:37 PM

[moving from BootIce releases thread per Wonko -@wonko, noticed yr flag so, k viva Pantelleria!]

 

Hi and sorry for the delay.

 

Got 2 1TB SATAIII WD10EZEX [both are Model# 00WN4A0 Thailand 27dec2015] drives, where, having THOUGHT I'd formatted em the same in Easeus, one of them (HD2) shows a 512 sector size (and is inaccessible) ONLY IF connected via external usb to SATA bridge.

 

The other (HD3) is fine either way, showing a 4096 sector size, as does HD3 when connected and accessible via internal SATA.

 

Both drives originally had ~70mb FAT primaries followed by 2 ~460mb NTFS Logical partitions. Currently the only change is now the FATs have been changed to NTFS. I can change those back to try the Switch.cmd trick as mentioned and downloadable here thanks to jaclaz  (aka Wonko?).

 

I'm now (unable to remove bold type formatting) going to attach what I hope are the right files as Wonko requested in the below copied BootIce thread start of this issue (if need more, it's that fsutil link says XP not supported).

 

my initial post:

 

Can I change back the sector size without losing data or partitions? [see ** below]. That's because: Maybe someone here has a guess about why, after using BootIce on a drive a month ago and accidentally commtting a change, but i don't know what it was, the drive's partitions, data and even size are only recognized in XPsp3 (eg explorer, diskmgr says 'unassigned space', bootice, easeus, etc) IF the drive is connected to internal sata port.      [As usb via an external sata-to-usb adapter with external ac power, the system shows a random small size drive; as an internal sata, the drive shows accurately as a 1 tb drive in 3 NTFS (1primary+2logical) partitions. I have another identical 1 tb WD SATAIII data-only drive with the same scheme (both drives were done up in Easeus months ago using identical options) that shows up accurately whether connected internally or as usb. Currently, ported so that both are usable (the problem drive ported to internal SATA), in BootIce's Partition Mgmt window both drives show identical data for  Drive No., ID, Active-no, Hidden-no, FileSys, and 1st partition Starting LBA. Also same bits for 0000:00->0F are listed in Sector Edit]

 

**2) cont'd, for anyone still reading (thank you): i just discovered this difference btwn the 2 drives:

The problem drive, H-I-J: 512 sector size, 1953525168 total sectors.

The stable drive, E-F-G: 4096 sector size,  244190646 total sectors. I'd prefer even a 64k cluster for both drives actually but they do have lots of small files, too.

 

Muchisimas gracias for any answers!! [sorry this is not more succinct]

--------------------------

SYS INFO:

internal sata: 2 onboard ports are intel sata1 + 2 ASMedia1061 pcie SATA3 ports.

System OS disk (and both of disks in question) is SATA1 with Win NT 5.x MBR and NTLDR boot record, with fresh RyanVM/nLited error-free xp install done a few days ago.

Pentium 4, 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700

**system includes 5-MsftEdit_v4.1_[FILEv5.41.21.2512]_Addon by Dibya.

 

DRIVE INFO:

[The problem drive, H-I-J: 512 sector size, 1953525168 total sectors.]

WDC WD10 EZEX-00WN4A0 SCSI Disk Device,(Standard disk drives),(0) OK,Disk drives,5.1.2535.0,SCSI\DiskWDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0____01.0 | SCSI\DiskWDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0____|SCSI\DiskWDC_WD10|SCSI\WDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0____0|WDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0____0|GenDisk|

 

[The stable drive, E-F-G: 4096 sector size,  244190646 total sectors]

WDC WD10 EZEX-00WN4A0 USB Device,(Standard disk drives),(0) OK,Disk drives,5.1.2535.0,USBSTOR\DiskWDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0________ | USBSTOR\DiskWDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0____|USBSTOR\DiskWDC_WD10|USBSTOR\WDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0_____|WDC_WD10EZEX-00WN4A0_____|USBSTOR\GenDisk|GenDisk|

 

@pasito
Two very different/separate questions.
#1 Sure it is possible to change the CODE in a MBR without changing the DATA in it, but this should not in any way affect a "data only" disk drive.
If you prefer when booting the CODE inside the MBR is read/executed (by the BIOS) whilst in a "data only" drive ony the data inside it (Disk Signature and Partition Table) is used.

#2 there is something that doesn't sound right with your report (or maybe it is only confusing and I cannot get it fully right). :unsure:
Anyway the sector size CANNOT normally be changed via software (and SHOULD NOT) be changed.
The disks are either NOT "identical" OR you are testing them differently OR *somehow* one of the two changed its behaviour (which I strongly doubt, but which still it is possible, at least in theory).
There are some USB "external cases" or "SATA-USB converters" that behave strangely, i.e. automagically convert 512 bytes devices to 4096 or viceversa, (whilst when directly SATA connected they use "native" sector size) if the disk drive is of the "new" (stupid) AF (or Advanced Format) kind.
Your drive(s) is/are seemingly:
https://community.wd...rnally/15580/10
AF (and thus use 4 kb sectors internally), it is entirely possible (though as said not "probable") that something in the disk drive firmware "recognizes" a particular partitioning pattern (or *whatever*) and turns off and on the internal translation from 4096 bytes/sector to 512 bytes sector, but it is more probable that the issue is with the USB to SATA bridge.

Normally an AF drive uses internally 4Kb sectors but exposes a translated 512 bytes geometry, we had a very similar issue here:
http://www.msfn.org/...ent-interfaces/
and now that I am re-checking that thread, I see that it is the EXACT SAME disk drive model :w00t: :ph34r:


Please take some time reviewing that thread on MSFN, JFYI at the time I came out with a specific workaround, NOT solution, here:
http://www.msfn.org/...ent-interfaces/

Then, please start a new thread, (the matter is not suited to this generic Bootice thread) here:
http://reboot.pro/fo...rmat-utilities/
and post there a copy of the MBR of the two disks and the oputput of the fsutil command like Dave-H did on MSFN.

Since you have two drives that behave differently, maybe this time we will be able to find an actual solution.

:duff:
Wonko

 

 



#2 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 28 May 2016 - 11:59 PM

I don't know how/can't attach, looked in Help Topic: Posting, but I don't have the '+' icon appearing. Lemme reconfigure some stuf in firefox and try again..it may not be til tomorrow.



#3 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 29 May 2016 - 01:36 PM

I don't know how/can't attach, looked in Help Topic: Posting, but I don't have the '+' icon appearing. Lemme reconfigure some stuf in firefox and try again..it may not be til tomorrow.

It's normal.

The attachment system becomes operative for new members as soon as someone reaches (I can never remember exactly) 50 or 100 posts, use instead a free file hosting system such as filedropper or zippyshare:

http://www.filedropper.com/

http://www.zippyshare.com/

and post the link(s).

 

:duff:

Wonko



#4 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 29 May 2016 - 08:24 PM

Thanks Wanko!

 

notes:

HD2 aka I-J-K aka 'problematic drive' works fine as connected, via ASMedia SATA

HD3 currently ported where HD2 no workie: usb-sata bridge [Sabrent USB-DSC5]

 

MBR_HD3_[USB_E-F-G]_63sectors_WD10EZEX(AF)_[20160528-BootIce]
PBR_HD3_[USB_E-F-G]_16Sectors_WD10EZEX(AF)_[20160528-BootIce]
MBR_HD2_[SATA_I-J-K]_63sectors_WD10EZEX(AF)_[20160528-BootIce]
PBR_HD2_[SATA_I-J-K]_16Sectors_WD10EZEX(AF)_[20160528-BootIce]
MBR_HD2_[SATA_I-J-K]_[20160528-HDHacker].dat
MBR_HD3_[USB_E-F-G]_[20160528-HDHacker].dat
BootSector_DriveE_HD3__[20160528-HDHacker].dat
BootSector_DriveF_HD3__[20160528-HDHacker].dat
BootSector_DriveG_HD3__[20160528-HDHacker].dat
BootSector_DriveI_HD2__[20160528-HDHacker].dat
BootSector_DriveJ_HD2__[20160528-HDHacker].dat
BootSector_DriveK_HD2__[20160528-HDHacker].dat
pasito-mbr,pbr,bs-checksums.md5


Edited by pasito, 29 May 2016 - 08:35 PM.


#5 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 30 May 2016 - 09:26 AM

Good. :)

The HD2 has all main structures set for a 512 bytes/sector.

The HD3 has all main structures set for a 4096 bytes sector.

 

To get this straight:

  1. HD2 works when directly connected to SATA BUT does not work when in the Sabrent
  2. HD3 works in the Sabrent BUT does not work when directly connected to SATA (OR it works in BOTH connections? :unsure:)

#1 As I see it is "normal": the disk is AF, thus exposes a 512 bytes sector, and the Sabrent thingy (for whatever reasons) senses it instead as 4 K "native" or "forces" it in 4k mode or "translates" it to 4K mode.

#2 depends on the behaviour, if HD3 works normally when connected directly to the SATA, it means that *somehow* *something* in it makes it *autoswitch* to 4K mode (possible but to be verified), if on the other hand - supposing that the Sabrent thingy "forces" or "translates" the disk to 4K sectors - HD3 should not work when directly connected to SATA.

 

Both disks seems like having been partitioned under XP or however with a tool using the "old" CHS boundaries.

 

If you have a Windows 7 or later handy (I think that the XP has not the "Bytes per physical sector" field), I would like to see the results of the command:

fsutil fsinfo ntfsinfo <drive letter>

Reference:

https://msdn.microso...5(v=vs.85).aspx

for drives "E:" (on HD3) (twice), once when connected to the SATA and once when connected to the Sabrent

and "I:" (on HD2) , once when connected to the SATA and once when connected to the Sabrent

(it may of course happen that you do not actually have an E: drive or a I: drive in both connections)

 

:duff:

Wonko



#6 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 30 May 2016 - 11:52 PM

ok! Thanks! well,

 

1) Clarification: Both drives are currently ported such that both function correctly, though there are paging errors for HD2. HD2 does not work via Sabrent, but HD3 does (i think both used to, can't be sure); and both disks work fine as scsi SATA direct, at least via ASMedia scsi/not-really-ahci pcie card (haven't tried 'em on the mainboard non-ahci Intel satas, but if i can get my OS to boot to samsung migrated SSD, then I'll try that -or no, i can easily swap out the optical to try it sooner- if you think useful).

 

fyi: Event Log paging errors on HD2, here.

(These been happening sporadically for awhile. Seemed?to have disappeared after disabling Tagged Queuing and Synchronous Transfer on HD2, ...until these errors yesterday. Maybe I should also note that my system has been having multiple i/0 read&write problems on all disks. While copying or deleted or renaming, the process never completes. I've assumed these been related to driver issues, particularly what i think to be a bad dell chipset driver, which i stopped using and deferred to the MS default driver. Since my last OS clean install, couple days ago, i've only had these problems on both my usb flash sticks. Driver issues are mosty beyond me. Today, SDI/Snappy Driver Install seems to have worked well though.)

 

2) The data retrieved via BootIce all came of course from those first, tiny partitions. With HD2 & HD3 ported, like now and as described above, such that both function correctly.

 

3) fsutil: Got a win8.1 x64 on which i can do fsutil on both drives by connecting them to the Sabrent, but it's a Lenovo aio so not sure i can get at its internal sata ports. Will get bk w you about that.

 

4) CHS buondaries question: [i've seen that term these months but will have to refresh my mind] ummm jeje it IS possible that i originally partitioned them, HD2&3, in a current version (would have been around Feb2016) of Easeus and then later on changed their primaries to fats btwn clean installs of xp by using a very outdated bootable cd version (Easeus v.4, I think) that doesn't even support ntfs. Or even using a Live OpenSuse dvd. But I thought i changed the primaries to fat after the new xp install using a 'middle-aged' Easeus v 9.1.0, or possibly even just using BootIce and just on the problematic HD2 (that would have been thetime I might have accidentally committed the change in BootIce, either to FAT16 or back to NTFS)

 

fyi: Easeus screenshots, since I still believe i did all the changes in Easeus 9.1.0 in xp, and since how it handles drives bears on our efforts, these may be informative for you Mr. Wonko...here's hoping.

HD3-Easeus_NTFS_info_(5-30-2016-8.27.23 PM).jpg
HD3-Easeus_Partition_info_(5-30-2016-8.27.28 PM).jpg
HD2-Easeus_NTFS_info_(5-30-2016-8.27.44 PM).jpg
HD2-Easeus_Partition_info_(5-30-2016-8.27.54 PM).jpg
HD3-Easeus_ClusterSize-4k_(5-30-2016-8.29.26 PM).jpg
HD2-Easeus_ClusterSize-512bytes_(5-30-2016-8.29.41 PM).jpg
EaseusABOUT-v.9.1.0_(5-30-2016-8.30.20 PM).jpg
pasito-Easeus_jpg_Screenshots-checksums.md5

..too much pasito in the blood...hope i didnt just give u a headache!

 

ps - my thread title, and maybe tags, probably could be improved? or maybe that to be determined as we go..


Edited by pasito, 31 May 2016 - 12:51 AM.


#7 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 31 May 2016 - 09:55 AM

Ok.

Re: CHS

For older OSes (up to XP) Microsoft has used a convention that is not actually *needed* since NT 3.1 or NT 3.51 about the geometry of a disk device that was "inherited" from DOS (it remained for years because of compatibility - in multi boot - with DOS based OS and because of the way most BIOSes used CHS geometry to boot).

In good ol' times the actual hard disks had a "real" geometry, not unlike a common floppy, which had two sides (i.e. two heads) and 80 sectors per track, a hard disk would have a number of platters, each with two sides (heads) and a given number of sectors per track, "assembled" in a Cylinder.

Little by little the real geometry became an "abstract" geometry, with no relation whatsoever to how data is internally stored on the hard disk, filling to the max the values available (this is simply a limitation of the space available in the MBR partition table for these three values), 1024 Cylinders x 255 Heads x 63 sectors, since the sector size has been (until recently) fixed to 512 bytes, this means (meant) that everything beyond 1024*255*63*512=8,422,686,720 bytes is NOT available to CHS indexing.

Although well before disks reached that size most OS's were updated to use instead LBA (Logical Block Addressing) that has a limit (again simply because of the limited amount of space available in the MBR partition table) of 2^32-1=4,294,967,295 sectors x 512 bytes/sector=2,199,023,255,040 the CHS way of addressing (and some of its limitations) is used in this or that program up to XP/2003 times.

Particularly the XP built-in Disk Manager (and most programs intended to replace it ) have "hardcoded" that a partition MUST end on a cylynder head boundary, i.e. on head 255 and on sector 63 and it is NEVER a good idea to run Disk Manager on a disk which partitions do not respect this requirement.

 

The GREAT ACT of stupidity came when the hard disk manufacturers came out with 4096 bytes/sector devices, though there is *nothing* really preventing *any* os to work natively with "different from 512 bytes/sector" in any file system there is a field specifying sector size (and as a matter of fact even DOS could use some 1024 bytes/sector device and Optical drives normally have 2048 bytes/sector) everyone for YEARS have written code that ASSUME that a hard disk device has a 512 bytes/sector and this mistake is so pervasive that is in practice impossible to track down all the issues/occurences connected to this, or anyway MS (and most of the other software developers) did NOTHING to correct this (self-created) problem.

So the hard disk manufacturers which were racing to have the biggest possible drive in the smallest possible form factor (the 3.5" and 2.5" have remained the same since capacities of 5 or 10 MB) had the brilliant idea of using anyway 4096 bytes/sector but re-mapping them as 8 "virtual" 512 bytes/sector internally, and the AF drives were born.

 

As a side note the UNNEEDED complication of the new GPT "style" comes from this inability to fix software around this non-512 bytes sector size, as the traditional MBR "style" with an increased sector size would have allowed us to have 2^32-1=4,294,967,295 sectors x 4096  bytes/sector=17,592,186,040,320 disk drives working fine without any need for yet another (IMHO poorly designed) "standard" (which BTW noone actually fully respects).

 

For a number of reasons (cache, pagesize, etc.) it came out that the traditional alignment of partitions to a nx255x63 was not optimal for data throughput (again committing a conceptual mistake as what matters is where the partition begins, or even better to which multiple actual data is stored inside the filesystem) and since Vista the "new paradigm" is to use "Mb aligned" partitions, i.e. up to XP the first partition would have one head (i.e. 0/1/1 or 63x512 bytes sectors) "before", later it would have (arbitrarily since the needed alignment is 4096 bytes) 0/32/33 or 2048x512 bytes sector (and anyway this way to align partitions is only valid for filesystems - like NTFS - that are "inherently aligned", i.e. which internal structures are anyway 4096 aligned and not valid for filesystems like FAT16 or 32 if not in a few "coincidence"cases).

 

Anyway, partition alignment is not involved in the issue at hand, which revolves around those drives being AF and (seemingly) exposing a different geometry when originally partitioned (most probably because one - or the other - of them was at the time connected through a "queerly behaving" USB interface).

 

To recap:

1) AF drives are internally 4096 bytes/sector but they expose externally 512 bytes/sector

2) In a "perfect world" they would ALWAYS expose a 512 bytes/sector BUT for *whatever reasons* this specific disk drive model has been reported in at least one case (see Dave-H thread on MSFN) to expose - when connected through a USB interface/external case - a 4096 bytes/sector or - in other words - *somehow* when connected through this USB interface the internal translation from "real" 4096 bytes/sector to exposed 512 bytes/sector does not happen

3) one of Pasito's drives has been partitioned at a time (through a given connection)  when the exposed sector size was 512 bytes/sector whilst the other one has been partitioned at a time (through a given connection) when the exposed sector size was 4096 bytes sector.

4) As per #3 above the two hard disk drives (same exact make/model) are NOT sporting the same behaviour (obviously since they have been differently partitioned/formatted)

 

What is needed:

a. understand whether the one (512 bytes/sector partitioning) or the other (4096 bytes/sector partitioning) is working "better" (or "at all") in the intended use

b. find a way to make both the drives behave the same (i.e. have them both either 512 or 4096)

OR (if neither sector size works appropriately in the intended use)

c. apply a workaround like the one was adopted in the case of Dave-H

 

Next needed info is the fsutil result, I will think about finding *some other program* or tool that would give the same kind of info (Physical sector size) i.e. that reliably uses the "IOCTL_STORAGE_QUERY_PROPERTY" and extracts that information or *something else* to the same effect, but right now I have no ideas. :(

 

:duff:

Wonko



#8 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 31 May 2016 - 07:22 PM

Update (and some related rantings :w00t: :ph34r:)
 
As the good fzabkar :thumbsup: described here:
https://community.wd...60mvwb0/14541/5
it is possible to use CrystalDiskInfo to get "Word 106" of the Identify device sector.
 
I find that getting a 4.5 Mb zip to run a GUI tool to be able to copy some data to Notepad and then look for the Identify device section and then get a word which is either 0x4000 or 0x6003 when actually what is needed is a single  §@ç#ing byte ( where an Optional value of 3 might mean the exponent of a mantissa 2 number to be multiplied by 512 to obtain the physical size of sectors in the device) is "pure folly".
 
So I went for a simpler (please read as more complicated) way.
 
Under Linux the HDparm can do it nicely since version 9.12, but the Win32 port has been discontinued since version 6.9:
https://web.archive....dns.org/hdparm/
in favour of Smartontools.
 
So the idea is now to get a 1.1 Mb NSIS installer:
https://sourceforge....rtmontools/6.5/
https://sourceforge....up.exe/download
 
 to extract from it (with 7-zip) a single file (smartctl.exe) about 900 Kb in size to run it *like*:
smartctl.exe -a /dev/sda | FIND "Sector Size"
 
to get either:
Sector Size: 512 bytes logical/physical
 
or:
Sector Sizes: 512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical
Now the old 6.9 Win32 port of hd parm above also uses "linux" syntax for devices, whilst there is another version (as well old, and as well 6.9) here:
http://axh.mbnet.fi/hdparm-win32.html
http://axh.mbnet.fi/...9-win32-bin.zip
which not only is a small executable around 40 Kb in size, but it also "sports" "Windows" syntax for devices, i.e.:
hdparm --Istdout \\.\Physicaldrive0
works nicely, hence this little batch :w00t: :ph34r: in XP will read the stupid "Word 106" (for \\.\PhysicalDrive0, change according to the drive to interrogate):
 
@ECHO OFF
SETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONS
SET Word106=
FOR /F "skip=15 tokens=3" %%A IN ('hdparm.exe --Istdout \\.\PhysicalDrive0') DO (
IF NOT DEFINED Word106 SET Word106=%%A&SET Word106
)
IF %Word106%.==4000. ECHO Sector Size: 512 bytes logical/physical
IF %Word106%.==6003. ECHO Sector Sizes: 512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical
while not *requiring* that a non-Linux user should know Linux syntax for devices.
 
:duff:
Wonko

#9 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 01 June 2016 - 09:44 AM

Well Wonko, an immense thank you once again; I intended to look up all of that on my own, not for you to write rough draft of a book chapter. Not that I think any of this is just for me. You are quite admirable. And I've only just now only skimmed yr latest post cuz been busy working on this.

 

So, contrary to my previous posts: What i been calling HD2 [I-J-K] still only works as SATA, while HD3 [E-F-G] ONLY works ported via Sabrent usb-sata bridge. If HD3 really ever worked as SATA, it doesn't now. (Plus alternating how their ported also alternates which is HD2or3, of course. Honestly i may've even screwed up which was HD2&3 + how ported on some posts) Additionally, swapping the two disks' connections, which causes both disks to be inaccessible, also 'swaps' their partition schemes (as reported by BootIce, despite their 'inaccessibility') such that the 4096 b/s disk becomes 512 b/s, and viceversa.

Really sorry for my inadvertantly misleading us all on this. Can we just erase all my previous posts? I'm sure no surprise on yr end, you were right all along. I was so sure I'd swapped the drives around numerous times and observed 'the 512b/s disk' working fine, all partitions visible, regardless of how I connected it, SATA or Sabrent. Not what i'm seeing now. My apologies. Also for taking so long to consider you might only be being polite not asking me to try fsutil on XP after I'd noted MS says XP not supported for fsutil.

 

FSUTIL works on XP, or appears to. Please see the results here:

FSUTIL on 2 WD10EZEX AF disks [md5-260e93df5e63c687841d19b004686453].txt

For this text file, I swapped the 2 WD10EZEX disks several times and triple checked my data reporting per disk s/n. How i been designating the disks has gotta change too. For the sake of the forum though i should let you decide whether to post any of it directly based on how best to clarify.

 

I'll assume yr latest post should be my next step unless i hear otherwise, but i have to be up in3 hrs for busy day so i may not get to it til Thursday. Dealing w the stuff going on w my pc also slowing me down, disk write/flush/paging errors one day, clean sailing the next. PagingExec on then off...blah bla. Unusable new EVO ssd. I'm not at all trying to bait yr generosity w off-topic struggles, just noting/acknowleging, in addition to level of expertise+comprehension, yr dedication to this compaired w mine.


Edited by pasito, 01 June 2016 - 10:03 AM.


#10 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 01 June 2016 - 01:25 PM

Maybe I have not been clear regarding FSUTIL FSINFO.

Sure it works on XP :), BUT the version on XP has only "Bytes per sector" (which correspond ONLY to the "Logical" size of the sector, and this comes from the PBR of the volume(s), we already got this data).
On XP you get either:
on HD2
Bytes Per Sector: 512
OR:
on HD3
Bytes Per Sector: 4096

While I was expecting something like:
on HD2
Bytes Per Sector: 512
Bytes Per Physical Sector: 4096
OR:
on HD3
Bytes Per Sector: 4096
Bytes Per Physical Sector: 4096

Independently from FSUTIL results (on 7 or later) I would also be curious about the contents of the "Word 106" as per previous post, just to confirm that the 6003 is there (or it isn't).

Though from your latest repoprt it is confirmed anyway that:
1) Volumes on HD2 s/n WCC6Y7VRD2DV are accessible when the disk is connected to SATA directly and they are NOT when connected via USB (SABRENT)
2) Volumes on HD3 s/n WCC6Y4SHPF17 are viceversa NOT accessible when connected to SATA directly and they are accessible when connected via USB (SABRENT)

For the diagnosing of the issue in itself there is no real *need* of further tests, the situation is EXACTLY the same as the one described by Dave-H on MSFN, and everything is back to normality (though not really "fine and dandy" or "cool" :().

Both disks are AF, have an internal physical sector size of 4096 bytes and expose externally a "translated" physical sector size of 512 bytes.

The USB converter inside the SABRENT external case, for *whatever* reasons (possibly because of the value in "Word 106" or maybe for the lack of any value in it or maybe for some other reasons) by-passes the disk's internal translation and believes it is "fully" 4096 bytes sector.

Unfortunately if you actually need/want to have the disk drives to be interchangeable (SATA direct vs. SABRENT USB connection) you will need to apply to both the same talked about workaround and run the "switcher.cmd" every time you exchange them.

:duff:
Wonko

#11 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 02 June 2016 - 09:56 PM

After trying various things, couldn't get the .bat to work, but here's what did [due to sys changes, F, not E, is now 1st par on HD2 -not HD3- s/n WCC6Y4SHPF17]:

 

HD2 Sabrent s/n WCC6Y4SHPF17:

F:\>smartctl.exe -a /dev/sda | FIND "Sector Size"
Sector Size:      512 bytes logical/physical

 

HD1 SATA s/n WCC6Y7VRD2DV:
I:\>smartctl.exe -a /dev/sda | FIND "Sector Size"
Sector Size:      512 bytes logical/physical
 

I finally did all the Word106.bat efforts at cmd prompt (and also switches) so you could see it with me, if interested or if you want us to work on it to get a .bat working in xp for posterity sake.

 

Also, using HDClone FreeEdition v6.0.7 (plug: very smooth error free boot disk option, got my ssd working as system dirve when Samsung's Data Migration tool did not), I saved some data on Sabrent bridge & our drives that may be useful to someone who can make sense of it. Here's the whole log. (i mean, there are errors like "PageFault-Exception on CPU 0:" but no HDClone errors)

 

e.g.:

393,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.010",4010,I,"EHCIController",22,"UPDATE for port 1h (1) portsc = 701803 POWERED CONNECTED"
394,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.010",4010,I,"EHCIController",22,"PLUG DEVICE, *port = 701801h (7346177)"
395,"",65551,"",65551,"4.013",4013,I,"",0,"[C0BE-C0BF SYSTEMBASE:/lib.storage.ata.dll]"
396,"",65551,"",65551,"4.035",4035,I,"",0,"[C0F0-C0F0 SYSTEMBASE:/lib.ata.dll]"
397,"",65551,"",65551,"4.068",4068,I,"",0,"[C0B2-C0B2 SYSTEMBASE:/lib.storage.sbc.dll]"
398,"",65551,"",65551,"4.079",4079,I,"",0,"[C0F1-C0F1 SYSTEMBASE:/lib.scsi.dll]"
399,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.093",4093,I,"EHCIController",22,"DEVICE PLUGGED: 1h (1)"
400,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.093",4093,I,"EHCIController",22,"DEVICE ID 1h (1)"
401,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"Vendor/ProductID: 152Dh (5421):2338h (9016)/100h (256)"
402,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"Serial      : 000001D91CC6"
403,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"Product     : USB to ATA/ATAPI bridge"
404,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"Manufacturer: JMicron"
405,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"USB BCD: 200h (512)"
406,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"Interface 0h (0), alternative 0h (0) (active)"
407,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"Class/Subclass/Protocol 8h (8):6h (6):50h (80)"
408,"ehci0",196634,"PortGuard",65549,"4.213",4213,I,"",0,"Endpoints: 2h (2)"
409,"",65551,"",65551,"4.244",4244,I,"",0,"[C0B7-C0B7 SYSTEMBASE:/dev.usb.storage.drv]"
410,"PCI",65545,"",65550,"4.314",4314,V,"PCI Service",1,"CC: 1018Ah (65930), 8086h (32902):266Fh (9839), CMD: 5h (5), IRQ: Bh (11), ADR: F900h (63744)"
411,"ide0",65557,"",65551,"4.320",4320,D,"IDE",28,"IDE PCI Dump"

 


Edited by pasito, 02 June 2016 - 10:42 PM.


#12 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 03 June 2016 - 12:41 AM

Hoping to replicate the [smartctl.exe -a /dev/sda | FIND "Sector Size"] operation after swapping the 2 disks' connections..unable. Got a bsod at partial desktop presumably just b4 the tray icon for Safely Remove could load. This had never occurred til now. With the ASMedia having hotswap, not just the usb connections, i'm assuming it's an asmedia/ahci/driver issue. i've rolled back asmedia driver (again..) and will try get you that operation's info later tonight. Only concern is whether yu think the bsod could have anything to do with having earlier performed the smartctl and failed word106 efforts on an ssd (Event log showed Harddisk0\D paging operation errors during those efforts; but also that pciide boot not loading and \Device\Scsi\asahxp321, did not respond within the timeout --so probably unrelated to what anyway are just disk info queries), or with xp now booting from ssd [on Asmedia SATA3 port], and if ssd at risk of being damaged. Now, Wonko, kind sir, pls do not invest tons or any energy in anything off topic in order to address my concern. i ain't stressing about this. Only hoping for a simple unresearched 'i don't know' or 'no' or 'yes yr ssd is at risk'.


Edited by pasito, 03 June 2016 - 12:44 AM.


#13 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 03 June 2016 - 08:10 AM

There is no risk in issuing the hdparm --Istdout command, AFAIK it is just an "interrogation" command, at the most it won't work.

Though it's strange, as I tested it on my XP and it worked fine (it should work only for directly connected disks, the USB interface will likely "filter" the command).

Most probably there is (as you noticed before) a still unresolved issue with drivers or maybe :ph34r: there is some hardware problem.

Usual seemingly crazy questions:
Can you check the power supply of that PC?
How old is it?
Is it powerful enough?
Or have you a spare one to try?

These kind of intermittent errors are often (not always, but often enough) connected with a defective or dying power supply or - in the case of "Harddisk0\D paging operation errors" it can (again often but not necessarily) connected to a defective SATA cable.

:duff:
Wonko

#14 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 03 June 2016 - 11:47 PM

Sr Wonko, thank you for that info. Had to copy/paste below cuz usb stick now doing the watuzi [Disk: The driver detected a controller error on \Device\Harddisk3\D.] while all other disks going fine..so only access to it was to open from notepad. Anywho..

 

fyi - Here's fsutil(s) from win8.1:

========================================
HD1 s/n WCC6Y7VRD2DV
win8.1 x64
fsutil
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.3.9600]
© 2013 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\admin>fsutil fsinfo ntfsinfo F:
Error:  The volume does not contain a recognized file system.
Please make sure that all required file system drivers are loaded and that the volume is not corrupted.

The FSUTIL utility requires a local NTFS volume.

C:\Users\admin>
========================================
HD2 s/n WCC6Y4SHPF17
win8.1 x64
fsutil
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.3.9600]
© 2013 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\admin>f:

 

F:\>fsutil fsinfo ntfsinfo F:
NTFS Volume Serial Number :       0x01d19834148ef6d0
NTFS Version   :                  3.1
LFS Version    :                  1.1
Number Sectors :                  0x0000000000003e81
Total Clusters :                  0x00000000000007d0
Free Clusters  :                  0x0000000000000688
Total Reserved :                  0x0000000000000010
Bytes Per Sector  :               4096
Bytes Per Physical Sector :       4096
Bytes Per Cluster :               32768
Bytes Per FileRecord Segment    : 4096
Clusters Per FileRecord Segment : 0
Mft Valid Data Length :           0x0000000000080000
Mft Start Lcn  :                  0x0000000000000002
Mft2 Start Lcn :                  0x00000000000003e8
Mft Zone Start :                  0x0000000000000420
Mft Zone End   :                  0x00000000000007d0
Resource Manager Identifier :     9320690C-13AE-11E6-BEC2-0025AB3EA49F
==================================

NEXT
 

Wonko said, above:

What is needed:

a. understand whether the one (512 bytes/sector partitioning) or the other (4096 bytes/sector partitioning) is working "better" (or "at all") in the intended use

b. find a way to make both the drives behave the same (i.e. have them both either 512 or 4096)

OR (if neither sector size works appropriately in the intended use)

c. apply a workaround like the one was adopted in the case of Dave-H

 

 

Guess my machine has not turned out to offer a very reliable test case cuz it's such an old Sergio Leone train depot. Is there nothing else i can do/provide/experiment for this issue?

 

a) Are they're benchmarks you'd like to see?

B) I don't need to be able to switch the drives in and out of the Sabrent but

c) i perfectly happy to reformat to fat32 their primary partitions and try out your workaround just to report how it goes.

 

-if i order a new usb-sata bridge or dock i might go with a Pluggable, avoid anything JMicron, ..do you know of a device that definitely doesn't have this issue?

 

-Also might pry open 2 mac disks w hfsexplorer to see if i'm willing to erase/transfer the wd10ezex to it and just reformat it from a sata port. If i do that, is there an xp x86 tool you'd recommend to ensure an error free wd10ezex?


Edited by pasito, 03 June 2016 - 11:49 PM.


#15 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 04 June 2016 - 08:10 AM

Well, the thing that we don't know (and that I am trying to understand if possible) is whether the behaviour is "because of the specific disk model" (it would be a coincidence that of all the disks around this same model behaved the same on Dave-H's PC) or "because of the specific USB case/Jmicron adapter" (I don't think I have the make/model of the external case Dave-H had on MSFN.

 

To recap:

1) those disks are AF and as such they have an internal physical sector size of 4096 bytes but expose (actually should expose) externally a size of 512 bytes

2) when connected to SATA directly they do expose a 512 bytes/sector size

3) when connected through the USB adapter/external case they do expose a 4096 bytes/sector size

 

A disk partitioned/formattted when directly SATA connected will use a logical sector equal to the exposed sector size, i.e. 512, while the same disk, when connected through the USB will have (since the exposed sector size becomes 4096) a logical sector size of 4096.

 

There is not anything "bad" in having a disk use a logical sector of 512 or having it use a 4096 bytes sector, there are only some differences that may be seen as either a problem or an advantage.

Namely:

1) the 4096 bytes sector one cannot be a boot device on most PC's and for most Operating systems, it can be only a "data repository".

2) probably the 4096 bytes sector access/transfer times might be (slightly) better (but possibly not much noticeable due to the USB bottleneck)

3) there will be some more "slack" space if the disk is filled with a zillion extremely small files, but nothing of relevance

 

The only issue with having that setup is that the 4096 disk directly connected through SATA will make it unmountable and viceversa connecting the 512 disk via USB will make it unmountable.

So the two disks cannot be liberally exchanged.

 

The ONLY potential problem is - as I see it - that IF the behaviour is due to a peculiar combination of the disk with the speciific USB case/controller, IF this piece of hardware fails and a replacement does not sport the same behaviour, it would be slightly more complicated to recover the data (but don't worry, there are ways to mount the volumes even with a different logical sector size.

 

So, if I were you, since you don't have any *need* to exchange the disks, I would leave everything "as is", as said what was provided at the time on MSFN is not at all a "solution", it is only a "workaround" and it would make little sense to use a workaround to fix something that is not really-really "broken".

 

On the other hand, if you find fun to experiment with strange, new things ;), then it's fine if you want to try the workaround.

 

:duff:

Wonko 



#16 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 04 June 2016 - 08:10 PM

On behalf of myself and anyone else who encounters this issue, particularly if they're down at my tech level, thank you Wonko for yr patience and perseverance. And yr avility/willingness to repeat yrself in new, succinct and effective ways.

 

The least i can do is try the workaround and also order and try an alternate sata to usb device. Obiously if i had the resources i wouldnt keep struggling w my antecuated dimension4700 but another 10-30 bucks for such a device to feed the issue and the strange fun is cool by me. But i'd like to get an adapter that is disimilar enough to provide us with some contrast right? I'll start looking now and if you want to employ yr better sense of technical criteria (or of strange fun) to suggest a device for me to buy, feel free.

 

ya, actually, if help to rule out the usb connection by connecting other drives to the Jmicron/sabrent bridge: i have 2 enclosure drives i MIGHT be able to UNenclose (a Verbatim with eSata/usb outs and a WD w just usb out); and now i've freed my prior system disk i can try it out on the Jmicron/Sabrent usb connection. It's a 3.5" Seagate Barracuda ST380013AS 7200.7 80GB 7.2K SATA1 Hard Drive. Until now i'd feared my foggy understanding of things would automagically give the Sabrent the ability to damage other disks. Speaking of which, the WD enclosed disk and also a WD1001FALS-00J7B1 internal drive are HFS mac disks for a machine i no longer have, uggh..but the verbatim is NTFS if i can get it out of the enclosure.


Edited by pasito, 04 June 2016 - 08:46 PM.


#17 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 04 June 2016 - 09:21 PM

My SATA to USB device is USB-DSC5 "Sabrent USB 2.0 TO SATA/IDE 2.5/3.5/-INCH Hard Drive Converter With Power Supply & LED Activity Lights [4TB Support]...Supports drives up to 2TB".

 

Wonko, might there be some way/utility in booting a drive via SATA and then connecting it, already booted, to the JMicron Sabrent? I got this *idea* from CyberLeader addressing unrelated USB-DSC5 Win7 Driver Stack issue.


Edited by pasito, 04 June 2016 - 09:22 PM.


#18 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 05 June 2016 - 08:39 AM

Well, no. :w00t:

 

Meaning that the supposed cause of the issue at hand needs to be confirmed (or debunked) doing tests with other AF disks (i.e. disks that have internally a 4096 bytes/sector but expose - should expose - 512 bytes/sector), that 80 Gb Seagate is surely "native 512" and thus it will be recognized always as 512 bytes/sector by *any* USB to Sata bridge.

 

What I am suposing at the moment is that EITHER:

1) the Sabrent/Jmicro *somehow* ignores AF disks (and thus sees them as "native 4k")

OR:

2) that the WD implementation of the AF interface is non-standard

OR:

3) both of the above :w00t: i.e. it is well possible that the specific HD model is somehow "not really AF" and the Jmicron controller misses the *whatever* should tell it that it is an AF disk, and the same Sabrent enclosure will work fine with any other AF disk, including WD ones but not that specific model while other USB to SATA brifges are instead able to detect the sector size correctly.

 

Seriously, the AF is not a "standard" (not that "standards", particularly "self-appointed committees' ones" are that good or properly documented, have a look at the over 2200 pages of the current EFI\GPT ones and read a few pages on Rod Smith's site http://www.rodsbooks.com/gdisk/to have an idea of how flawed or at least non-standard are the leading OS implementations), it is more than anything else an attempt by the hard disk manufacturers to provide stupidly large disks in a time when the software is not actually ready for them.

 

WD in this case topped the stupidity level because while there may be the need of an AF disk for sizes bigger than the infamous 2.2 Tb, it makes no sense whatsoever to use this translation for 1 Tb disks, surely they did that for manufacturing reasons, i.e. *somehow* it is cheaper for them to have a 4Kb sectored platter than a 512 byte, or maybe they use three platters for their 3 Tb disk and your 1 Tb disk has only one of them, cannot say.

 

It is usually a big PITA to even find decently complete specifications for a hard disk model (regardless from the manufacturer), and even the AF logo:

https://en.wikipedia...Advanced_Format

(the one that actually means "512e" :whistling: , and this should tell you something about how illogical and confused is the specific matter ;))  may or may not be present physically on the HD label.

More similar rantings (and some additional info) is on the "original" thread:
http://www.msfn.org/...ent-interfaces/

 

:duff:

Wonko

 



#19 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 05 June 2016 - 10:22 PM

all i will say is :blush: [= i'm not carrying any of the weight here. Also, i see contradictions where you do not; i assume/trust yr expertise and not my comprehension, so i'll try to keep quiet about what i think i see]

 

For the workaround, i about to reformat the primaries of both WD10EZEX [AF] disks to FAT32 [doing so of course with XP since our win8.1 Lenovo has no SATA ports. And also of course reformating them with s/n WCC6Y7VRD2DV connected to SATA and s/n WCC6Y4SHPF17 connected to JMicron/Sabrent USB-SATA bridge].

 

btw, below are the Dave-H specs, just to include for the thread:

 

[MSFN post Jan 5, 2015] The old drive was a Hitachi HDS721010KLA330, which was originally in my Sky+ satellite PVR.

The enclosure I'm using is a NL-HD29 made by Newlink.


Edited by pasito, 05 June 2016 - 10:28 PM.


#20 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13750 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 06 June 2016 - 04:52 PM

Well, that workaround does not involve the reformatting to FAT32.

 

It is designed as follows:

- a minimal FAT12 partition is deployed/created to the beginning of the disk through mkprilog.cmd

- you use *whatever* tool to create a second primary partition and format it to NTFS

- you run the mkdualdisk.cmd to make the disk suitable for using the switcher

- when you change interface/connection you run the switcher.cmd

 

:duff:

Wonko



#21 pasito

pasito

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:Barcelona, Venezuela (jeje, not really)
  • Interests:SYS INFO:
    -XPsp3 x86, P4 530J 3GHz, 3GB Ram, ich6, Dell Dimension 4700
    -Internal SATA: 2xIntel SATA1 + 2xSATA3 ASMedia1061(PEG 16X)
    -OS: SATA1 80GB WinNT 5.x MBR, NTLDR boot record
  •  
    Venezuela

Posted 06 June 2016 - 09:39 PM

yeah, after looking at yr readme for that workaround i can't use it without also reformatting the first of each disk's 2 logical partitions which are 3-400gb each of data i have nowhere else to put.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: bridge, af, sector size, ntfs, wd10ezex, interface, switch.cmd, usb-sata, usb to sata

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users