Solved

Scandisk out of memory on 147GB SATA RAID

Posted on 2004-10-16
15
587 Views
Last Modified: 2013-12-29
I just upgraded to new hardware with 2 Western Digital 74GB 10,000 RPM Raptors in RIAD 0 configuration, using the 378 Promise RAID chipset on an ASUS P4C 800E Deluxe motherboard.  Everything went well, the MS hotfix for the 3.4GHz P4 speed issue did not run, but there is a new CPUID 0 parameter in the AMI BIOS which can be enabled so that the OS reads a value less than 3 and that allowed Windows 98SE to run at standard speed at 3.4 GHz.  I then installed the network neighborhood and a few rudimentary items, a USB printer even worked, although the Intel USB 2.0 patch also did not do what the instructions said, it just flashed really fast so that I could not tell what it was doing, there were no files in any directory, despite the fact that it said it would expand a list of files in a subdirectory, which it would create when I ran the self-extracting file.  Well, the slower older USB 1.1 printer worked, so I did not argue.

But when I run scandisk from My Computer -> SATA RAID Drive C:\ -> Properties -> Tools -> Check Now -> Start – I get the error message "ScanDisk could not continue because your computer does not have enough available memory.  If any other programs are running, quit one or more of them and then try running ScanDisk again."

The 2 Raptors amount to 147 GB and I told FDISK to use all the available space with 32-bit file system – do I need to stay under 137 GB or lower?  I have 512 MB of memory, which the system sees and which works well – everything is brand-new and works fast.  Is there a System.ini
0
Comment
Question by:brnbrg
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • +1
15 Comments
 

Author Comment

by:brnbrg
ID: 12326635
Sorry - I got cut off - I meant to say, is there another System.ini entry, I added all you previously recommended, a MaxPhysPage=40000 entry in the [386enh] section of SYSTEM.INI, added the following line to the [vcache] section:

MaxFileCache=396216

and added the following line to the [386enh] section:

ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1

But none of this made a difference - I still get the same error message when trying to run ScanDisk.  I hope this is not a problem with SATA RAID 0 itself, because I do not need that 147 GB space and could easily make the C:\ Drive smaller and create a second volume on it with FDISK.

Also:  MS system info shows 84% of resources available, 511 MB of memory and the MS system monitor shows Kernel CPU usage of peak 25% with an average of about 18%.  MS Windows 98 4.10.2222 A, clean install with IE 5.

It shows 141,234 MB [FAT 32] available.

Also:  Drive D: is a 20 GB UIDE drive on the new ASUS mobd's primary IDE controller, an ATA 100 drive, and it works fine with ScanDisk etc., hence, it is either a SATA issue or a disk space issue resulting from the on-board Promise 378 chipset combining the 2 WD 74 GB Raptors into one large C: drive.
0
 

Author Comment

by:brnbrg
ID: 12326674
I just succeeded in running ScanDisk after booting into DOS mode, but it won't let me defrag, saying that defrag.exe requires Windows and in Windows defrag gives me the same error as ScanDisk does in Windows.  Again, drive D:, a small 20 GB UIDE drive on the primary IDE channel, defrags just fine, hence, the programs seem to be running just fine.

I heard that defrag.exe from Windows ME is compatible and can be run on WIndows 98SE installations and is twice as fast as the native defrag.exe - is that true?

Can the Windows and DOS scandisk versions of Windows ME be used also under Windows 98SE, or can only defrag.exe be used on both OSs?

Thank you very much in advance.

Sincerely,
Bernard
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:jthow
ID: 12326684
brnbrg,

This used to be a problem with W95 Scandisk if there were more than the theoretical maximum of 52,416 files and folders for ScanDisk to scan. The practical number could be somewhat lower.  Is it possible that you have exceeded some limit in the W98 version of Scandisk?  Can you run Scandisk in Safe Mode or directly from DOS (with a suitable config.sys & autoexec.bat to maximise DOS base memory)?

JohnT
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:jthow
ID: 12326706
brnbrg,

Thinks: The win OS's don't have 48-bit LBA support; they are limited to 137gb HDDs -  the 24 bit limit.

I don't know the answer to your ME Scandisk/Defrag question, but I would guess the limit is still the same - even XP wouldn't support more than 137gb before SP1.

JohnT
0
 
LVL 13

Expert Comment

by:gonzal13
ID: 12329476
You can check if there is a firmware burn for your bios to allow it to see more than 137gigs. The other would be to partition the HD.

gonzal13(joe)
0
 

Author Comment

by:brnbrg
ID: 12330851
This is a bummer - I was aware of the 137 GB limit, but thought that this fanciest of motherboards with a really fancy BIOS could take care of it, or the 20378 chip set from Promise - I guess, no such luck.

By the way, the ASUS P4C 800E Deluxe has such a fancy and forgiving AMI BIOS that despite the fact that both known hotfixes, one from MS for Windows 98SE speed 2.1 GHz limitations and the one from Intel for Windows 98SE lack of native support for USB 2.0 failed to install themselves, the BIOS still took care of both issues.  There is now a new CPUID 0 parameter, and enabling it returns a value less than 3, which suddenly allows Windows 98SE to zoom right along at 3.4 GHz without a protection error - as a matter of fact, entirely stable.  And the USB ports work, although the Intel hotfix failed, too, so this is a super motherboard/BIOS combo.

This is really a big loss of time - is there any way to repartition the C: drive without losing all that work now that everything works, or is that not safe, because I do not like any flaky solutions?  Many people never fully trusted Partition Magic and other stuff like that...

So, what you're saying then is that everybody who buys a 250 GB drive has to at least cut it in half and keep track of that mess of drive letters, even in Windows XP?  Then what's the point of getting XP - it's just a similar mess, with a lot of new bugs and idiosyncrasies to worry about...

Re:  Defrag.exe from ME - in my notes there is an old printout of a question & answer thread back from the days of Askme.com where a website generated "tip" motioned that ME's defrag.exe works perfectly fine on 98SE, but is twice as fast and reliable.  But I always worry about sweeping statements and would like to ask if anybody knows really the answer to this as almost 3 years have gone by.  Is there a link to a MS article or other reliable info that this is so?  Because I do not want to proceed with ME's defrag.exe and a couple of weeks later find that I mangled my files like in a sausage maker...

Defragging the regular ATA 100 drive on the primary IDE channel was slow as molasses (as always), hence, getting a faster defrag would surely help, but it has to be absolutely reliable.

Thank you very much in advance.

Sincerely,
Bernard
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:jthow
ID: 12331742
Bernard,

I think you will still have the problem with ME's defrag.  ME does not support partitions of that size any more than 98 does.

Windows XP originally did not support 48-bit LBA addressing but Windows XP SP1 does. So, if an XP user wants to use 48-bit LBA support, they must apply Windows XP SP1 or later.  Windows XP Media Center Edition and Windows XP Tablet PC Edition were shipped with SP1 included.

Your best bet would seem to be to use a commercial partitioning program such as PartitionMagic or Paragon's Partition Manager to re-partition the disk.  I have used PartitionMagic successfully to re-partition drives, but not (so far!) larger than 120gb, without loss of data. PartitionMagic 8 supports drives and partitions up to 300gb and will run on W98.  I'm not sure of any limitations on disk / partition size with Partition Manager, but it claims to work with W98 and has its own defragmenter.  As with any operation involving your HDD's structure, you would be well advised first to to ensure you have a reliable back up.  [I hope you have a DVD re-writer avai;lable ;-)]

Usual disclaimers - and Good Luck.

JohnT

0
Threat Intelligence Starter Resources

Integrating threat intelligence can be challenging, and not all companies are ready. These resources can help you build awareness and prepare for defense.

 
LVL 41

Expert Comment

by:stevenlewis
ID: 12332090
Your computer does not have enough free memory to defrag the drive. Quit one or more programs.
ID# Defrag009
ScanDisk could not continue because your computer does not have enough available memory.
CAUSE
This issue can occur if you are running Windows on a hard disk that is larger than 8 gigabytes (GB) in size and has a cluster size less than 8 kilobytes (KB). This configuration may be created if you use a third-party disk tool to create a partition on a hard disk that is larger than 8 (GB) in size and has a cluster size less than 8 KB.
RESOLUTION
To resolve this issue, contact the manufacturer of the third-party hard disk tool to inquire about a possible update to the software that resolves this issue.


MORE INFORMATION
The standard FAT32 cluster size of 4,096 bytes only applies for hard disks smaller than 8 GB. The third-party hard disk tool may change the cluster size to 4,096 bytes per allocation unit.

The default cluster sizes are listed in the following table.
Hard disk size Cluster size
-------------------------------

512 MB to 8 GB — 4 KB

8 GB to 16 GB — 8 KB

16 GB and larger — 16 KB

matter of fact check this whole page, if for no other reason then to know you are not alone, and maybe something here can help

http://www.computing.net/windows95/wwwboard/forum/13499.html
for more info see these links
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q132/8/32.asp
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q134/9/86.asp
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q229/1/54.aspp







maybe some if this will help
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:jthow
ID: 12332872
stevenlewis,

Those references are for the original problem with W95's Scandisk.  This is not Bernard's problem, which is an OS limitation rather than an application one.

JohnT
0
 
LVL 13

Expert Comment

by:gonzal13
ID: 12334593
Hi:



So, what you're saying then is that everybody who buys a 250 GB drive You should see if there is as firmware update to the bios to take care of the HD size. Be sure to let the firmware burn completes itself or you will ruin the board. Normally when you buy a motherboard or Promise Card their exist an update for the bios, since the hardware that you buy is manufactured about a year before you bought it.

Also Windows 98 will not accept memory any larger than 512, actually can seen only 407megs. I did this using several memory optimizers.

Do not worry about the scan disk, it is not used very much in optimizing drives anymore. If by chance you interrupt Windows and reboot and you come to scan disk, just press 'Enter" and you can skip it.

I found this on the expert database but it is from 1999, which suggest the lack of importance of this function.

Do scandisk /fix.
Method A:
At Start - Programs - Accessories - System Tools - ScanDisk, at drive letter,
checked the box, [x] Automatically fix errors. Click [Start] to perform.

Or go to the Command mode,
at c:\ prompt type " scandisk /all /Autofix " without quotation.



Defrag with large HD drives has become unpractical and considered not an optimizer as it used to be.

The expert database only covers HDs of 20 gig!


gonzal13(joe)
0
 
LVL 6

Accepted Solution

by:
jthow earned 200 total points
ID: 12339791
Joe,

Several separate issues there....

BIOS Support:-

What size of HDD does your BIOS support and is there an update available?  I have a Dell Dimension 4100 which will not support HDDs bigger than 137gb, even with the latest BIOS upgrade.  (Dell actually told me it wouldn't support > 80gb, but what do they know???)

Obviously, at some point in the life of a system the supplier will decide there's no economic sense in continuing to provide patches for the thing.  That may be well before the user has decided to go for an upgrade or new system entirely.

Does the disk supplier provide a way round the BIOS limitation?  I installed a Seagate ST3120026A 120gb HDD on the above machine before I'd got hold of the BIOS upgrade.  The Seagate installation s/w recognised the BIOS would not support that size disk and installed the Ontrack Dynamic Disk Overlay (DDO) to circumvent the problem: That made all of the disk usable.

Operating System (OS) Support:-

Even if the BIOS will support the disk size, or there's an available DDO circumvention, there's no pont in configuring the disk in a way the OS won't handle properly.  As mentioned above, prior to XP SP1, windoze did not support HDDs > 137gb. XP has been available forat least 3 years now and Micro$oft see no economic sense in providing patches to earlier operating systems to enable them to support more recent hardware - particularly where the original architecture of the OS makes doing so a complex and costly exercise.  (If, indeed, the artchitecture could actually support it at all.)

Scandisk / Defrag:-

Whilst HDDs are fairly reliable pieces of kit these days, they are still mechanical devices and can and do develop errors.  Whist I would agree that windoze tends to go for overkill when deciding whether to run Scandisk at startup, I don't think I'd be happy never to be able to run it.  However, Bernard says he can run Scandisk from DOS, so that isn't an issue here.

Whether or not it's worth running Defrag on very large disks is probably a matter of personal preference - even if an NTFS system is less likely to benefit from a defragmentation than a FAT one..  Actually, partitioning the disk can help here.  For example, I have an archive of a large number of source files - some of considerable size.  These are static and reside in their own partition.  It doesn't need to be deframented ever and having those files separated out means they don't get in the way of defragmenting more active stuff.

JohnT

0
 
LVL 13

Expert Comment

by:gonzal13
ID: 12342257
This may help:
Promise's Enhanced SATA PCI adapter solutions include advanced HBA features for ultimate application flexibility. The line of HBAs features a low-profile form factor that is compact enough to fit into small rackmount servers. All of the cards support a 66MHz PCI bus for up to 266MB/sec burst data transfer rate. And all of Promise's Enhanced SATA adapters use a Promise ASIC with large LBA support for drives above 137GB and an onboard BIOS that automatically identifies and configures drive type.

http://www.promise.com/company/press/press_news_detail_eng.asp?press_id=104

gonzal13(joe)
0
 

Author Comment

by:brnbrg
ID: 12345626
First, sorry for th delay, didn't have a PC for quite awhile...

Well, there wasn't much of a revelation here, because I knew about the 137 GB limit and was upset the moment I realized how easily I could have spared myself all that work - I really did not need 147 GB anyway.  Breaking the drive up, it came out as a formatted 80GB C: drive and a 62 GB D: drive.

Sorry Joe, your trust in Promise is misplaced - I installed a lot of the Promise cards as PCI add-on cards and then they are really dynamite.  But here I'm using the ASUS on-board 20378 chipset by Promise - poor documentation, poor support, confusing setup, have to spend hours trying all kings of stuff.  All I can say, Joe is that I loaded the Promise driver from the ASUS CD in the proper directory:

E:\Drivers\Promise\378RAID\Win98-Me

and Windows saw the drive and its size accurately, but defrag did not - and I need defrag to survive, hence, what good is it if everything runs and works really well, but then you are finished because you can't defrag.

The greatest tip was to use the defrag.exe file from Windows ME - tried them side by side and the one from ME is really twice as fast - saves me a lot of time.  But also ME's defrag could not run on the 147 GB drive - so remember, despite excellent and smooth installation of Windows and all ASUS, MS, Intel and Promise supplied drivers, I still ran into this issue.

Thanks to all!

Sincerely,
Bernard
0
 
LVL 13

Expert Comment

by:gonzal13
ID: 12351117
Bernard:

Thanks for the comments.

I am hapy everything worked out.

Joe
0
 
LVL 13

Expert Comment

by:gonzal13
ID: 12351305
Bernard:

That is what is wonderful about this site. Everyone comments on a problem and finally about 99.9 percent a comment leads to a solution. As for me I just enjoy helping as much as possible. It is very self satisfying when one can help someone else. Going to a PC store sometimes is a lost cause, since there may be only two techs which do not have all the answers and the result the PC is reformated. Here there many contributors.

As for me I learned that the defrag for ME is twice as fast than that of Win98.

Joe
0

Featured Post

Too many email signature updates to deal with?

Do you feel like you are taking up all of your time constantly visiting users’ desks to make changes to email signatures? Wish you could manage all signatures from one central location, easily design them and deploy them quickly to users? Well, there is an easy way!

Join & Write a Comment

NTFS file system has been developed by Microsoft that is widely used by Windows NT operating system and its advanced versions. It is the mostly used over FAT file system as it provides superior features like reliability, security, storage, efficienc…
In this article, I will show you HOW TO: Install VMware Tools for Windows on a VMware Windows virtual machine on a VMware vSphere Hypervisor 6.5 (ESXi 6.5) Host Server, using the VMware Host Client. The virtual machine has Windows Server 2016 instal…
The viewer will learn how to successfully create a multiboot device using the SARDU utility on Windows 7. Start the SARDU utility: Change the image directory to wherever you store your ISOs, this will prevent you from having 2 copies of an ISO wit…
Windows 8 came with a dramatically different user interface known as Metro. Notably missing from that interface was a Start button and Start Menu. Microsoft responded to negative user feedback of the Metro interface, bringing back the Start button a…

757 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question

Need Help in Real-Time?

Connect with top rated Experts

21 Experts available now in Live!

Get 1:1 Help Now