
Mick Mickle
Members-
Content Count
83 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Mick Mickle last won the day on November 29 2018
Mick Mickle had the most liked content!
About Mick Mickle
-
Rank
Advanced Member
Profile Information
-
Gender
Male
-
Location
Las Cruces, NM
Recent Profile Visitors
509 profile views
-
Mick Mickle started following Load Cycle Count on Seagate Backup Plus 5TB, Lifehacker Article, Stablebit Scanner loses all settings on unexpected shutdowns. and 3 others
-
Some honorable mention for Scanner in the comments of this new article: https://lifehacker.com/how-to-check-if-your-hard-drive-is-failing-1835065626
-
[Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
Mick Mickle replied to Jaga's question in General
It makes a lot of sense to point to 3216 as the sole cause, and the constant rewriting of the Diskid files may be partly to blame in this case, but this is why I think some other factor is involved here: 1. The manual settings backup I made before upgrading didn't restore the custom names for three disks under 3246. (Perhaps the frequent Diskid file writing resulted in corrupt data written to the backup file also?) 2. On the two machines that experienced lost settings after the 3246 upgrade, I uninstalled 3246 and reinstalled 3216 after my post above: Voila! All the settings were -
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: [Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
-
[Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
Mick Mickle replied to Jaga's question in General
I upgraded from 3216 to 3246 Beta on two machines. On my WS2012R2E VM, all the settings persisted through the upgrade on 3246, but on my laptop, Scanner lost the settings (disk names, last scanned date). I restored the settings from the last backup made on March 16, but the last scanned time is never -- I guess because March 16 is more than the 30 days I have set for scan interval. I think this is another example of why automatic periodic backups would be a good feature. Edit: I upgraded from 3216 to 3246 on a third machine, WS2012R2, with mixed settings experience. Seven disks kept -
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: Scanner 2.5.4.3216 "upgrade" loses my setups!
-
Stablebit Scanner loses all settings on unexpected shutdowns.
Mick Mickle replied to FirstAidPoetry's question in General
Thanks, @Wiidesire! Your discovery looks like it might solve the this CDIDW (constant Diskid write) root problem for a number of threads, including the ones I've enumerated below. A useful new Scanner feature, now that the program has effective settings backup and restore, would be automatic backups, for example, weekly. That way, a backup that would more accurately reflect the scanned state of drives might exist when needed. (Manual backups are less likely to have been made within the last scheduled scan window; thus, even though disk names and other settings can be restored, scan -
Thanks, @Wiidesire! Your discovery looks like it might solve the root problem for a number of threads, including the ones I've enumerated below, where I've added a duplicate of this post to help close the loop. According to Christopher, Beta version 2.5.4.3246 addresses and fixed this CDIDW (constant Diskid write) issue by increasing the interval from once every second, allowing shutdowns and upgrades with low risk of corrupting the Diskid files and losing scanning history. A useful new Scanner feature, now that the program has effective settings backup and restore, would be auto
-
Thanks, @Wiidesire! Your discovery looks like it might solve the root problem for a number of threads, including the ones I've enumerated below, where I've added a duplicate of this post to help close the loop. According to Christopher, Beta version 2.5.4.3246 addresses and fixed this CDIDW (constant Diskid write) issue by increasing the interval from once every second, allowing shutdowns and upgrades with low risk of corrupting the Diskid files and losing scanning history. A useful new Scanner feature, now that the program has effective settings backup and restore, would be automati
- 9 replies
-
- scanning histories
- drive locations
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
[Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
Mick Mickle replied to Jaga's question in General
Thanks, @Wiidesire! Your discovery looks like it might solve the root problem for a number of threads, including the ones I've enumerated below, where I've added a duplicate of this post to help close the loop. According to Christopher, Beta version 2.5.4.3246 addresses and fixed this CDIDW (constant Diskid write) issue by increasing the interval from once every second, allowing shutdowns and upgrades with low risk of corrupting the Diskid files and losing scanning history. A useful new Scanner feature, now that the program has effective settings backup and restore, would be automatic b -
Apparently, yes: Either a crash or planned shutdown could result in corrupted Diskid files because they were being constantly written.
- 9 replies
-
- scanning histories
- drive locations
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: Stablebit Scanner loses all settings on unexpected shutdowns.
-
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: Stablebit Scanner loses all settings on unexpected shutdowns.
-
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: [Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
-
[Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
Mick Mickle replied to Jaga's question in General
Chris, I've been using 2.5.4.3216 for a long time now, and it's working well on multiple installations, with this exception: Almost any reboot of my WS2012R2E VM, planned or otherwise, results in Scanner losing all its data. I've been making backups in advanced settings, but not regularly, so even though I can get back to tailored names, the scanning history is usually too old and requires all the drives to be rescanned. Do you think the disk id's being updated too often, as summarized above, would also be the cause of my problem? And 2.5.4.3246 could be the remedy? -
Christopher (Drashna) reacted to an answer to a question: Seagate Load Cycle Count
-
Thanks, Christopher. I agree. Currently, I have a SMART warning just for LCC, so I did permanently ignore it.
-
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: Seagate Load Cycle Count
-
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: [Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
-
Mick Mickle reacted to an answer to a question: Load Cycle Count on Seagate Backup Plus 5TB
-
CrystalDiskInfo worked fine so far to reduce the timing on Seagate. At least it will ease my mind even if the LCC isn't critical. I posted results at the pinned thread:
-
Load Cycle Count on Seagate Backup Plus 5TB
Mick Mickle replied to matthew.austin's question in General
Thanks for this tip! CrystalDiskInfo 7.8.3 x64 worked better for my Seagates than WDidle3 for WD, and I didn't even have to remove them from the server. Over a 5-day period of testing, one ST4000DM000 drive that had a LCC of nearly 250,000 in 2 years dropped to a rough estimate of 1 head park per 8 minutes after I set the APM midway at 80h, and the other ST4000DM000 that was sitting at 369,149 LCC had the park timing reduced to about once every 20 minutes when set to highest performance FEh. The first setting should result in an annual LCC less than 70,000, and the second should be less than -
[Bug?] Prior scan data and settings not preserved on update
Mick Mickle replied to Jaga's question in General
Related? -
I've been noticing this as well several times with V. 2.5.4.3216 in a VM when it restarts. I thought this was somewhat related to the thread for preserving data when upgrading, because I thought the json methodology would keep this problem from happening when a machine was turned off or crashed. (I referenced this thread over there as well.) Anyway, the backup/restore settings function works well, especially now that it uses one zip file. But...but...but... if you haven't backed up recently, your scanning history will be older than the 30-day rescan default, and all the disks will need to
-
Thanks, Christopher. That's what I thought from earlier comments you've made. How about this question concerning "Ignore S.M.A.R.T. Warning" in Scanner?