Replacement option(s) for chkdsk

[phaZed]

I agree. But this is also the only thing I ever knew it to be intentionally designed to handle. It is not a "disk fixer" but a "filesystem on the disk fixer."

It would have better been named CHKFS

Most linux distro's it is fsck

 

[fincoder]

this is also the only thing I ever knew it to be intentionally designed to handle

Exactly. It originated in a time when drive hardware failures were rare, and when the OS didn't automatically repair the filesystem.

In the 'olden days' reallocating bad sectors did not necessarily indicate a failing drive, so that chkdsk function was useful. Nowadays, you don't want chkdsk doing that (unless cloned) because it's likely to make the problem worse.

 

[Sky-Knight]

Most linux distro's it is fsck

And just fsck it rolls off the tongue so much better than chkdsk it.

 

[Metanis]

I can't honestly recall the last time I had SFC or DISM conclusively fix an issue. By the time I'm there it's just easier to reset Windows.

CHKDSK is mostly for fixing those power bump issues when Windows lost track of some file allocation pointers. I run it from administrative command prompt first with no flags. If there are no errors reported, then it's done with very little chance of making a bad situation worse.

If there are errors, then it's time to recover data and/or clone the drive before going farther. Once I'm assured of data integrity then I'll do a /f flag and let it fix the errors. That's effective almost all the time.

If the drive is questionable and I can afford to lose it totally I'll do the /r flag and let it try to read every cluster. It will either cure the patient or kill it. It's not a tool to fix mechanical issues with a drive but it can at least mark bad clusters that may have been damaged in a minimal head crash.

 

[mikeroq]

On the side not of flash drives or external drives, I almost always eject if I'm writing to them. Especially if I just copied a file. If it's been sitting for a bit since transfer I'll just pull out. Or if it was just reading. I want to ensure what I wrote is actually present 100%.

 

[nlinecomputers]

I agree. But this is also the only thing I ever knew it to be intentionally designed to handle. It is not a "disk fixer" but a "filesystem on the disk fixer."

It would have better been named CHKFS

CHKDSK can do a surface scan and move data off a bad block and mark it bad. And back in the day when a hard disk might develop a rare bad block that was a useful thing. These days hard drive that develop bad block tend to quickly deteriorate. Often because a small spec of metal has broken off in the drive and struck the platters. Do a full scan of the drive just means you will strike that bad spot again and just drag the heads cutting a groove into the disk. One bad block is an immediate drive replacement.

I run hardware scans first then CHKDSK without switches to see if there is a problem then evaluate the report to judge if it is a simple repair that chkdsk should fix or if a full clone with data recovery is needed next.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Most linux distro's it is fsck

And if you need to run it you’re probably already fscked.

 

[phaZed]

And if you need to run it you’re probably already fscked.

I fsck other people's fscked drives with my generally unfscked drive.

 

[Markverhyden]

How? [And that's a serious query as to what it is you do, not snark].

Float test

 

[Diggs]

On the side not of flash drives or external drives, I almost always eject if I'm writing to them.

Is it just me or does Windows routinely have a problem letting go of USB external drives? I can almost always eject USB flash media from within Windows but rarely will Windows let go of an external USB drive. I either have to repeatedly ask for the USB drive to be disconnected or shut down the machine before unplugging the drive.

 

[britechguy]

I either have to repeatedly ask for the USB drive to be disconnected or shut down the machine before unplugging the drive.

I've never noticed any significant (that is, repeated on some routing, predictable basis) difference in ejecting any USB media, and I do occasionally do so.

I just pull the plug for the most part when I know that no writing is taking place, as write caching for USB devices has been turned off by default since Windows 7. Most of the time that does not result in any complaint when I later use the device, either.

 

[Diggs]

I just pull the plug for the most part when I know that no writing is taking place, as write caching for USB devices has been turned off by default since Windows 7. Most of the time that does not result in any complaint when I later use the device, either.

I used to just pull the plug and go (after letting things idle for awhile) but I got too many media errors which were usually only resolved with chkdsk. (Hence part of this thread's discussion) Now I'll wait for Windows to tell me I can pull it and just shut down if it doesn't give me the all clear.

 

[Fred Claus]

I know that recently one of our data recovery experts (and I'm sorry I cannot recall who) said that using chkdsk is really not something one wants to do in this day and age because it can cause as many problems as it can fix. If, by chance, my memory is faulty, then correction would be appreciated.

But, presuming I am remembering correctly, what are the suggested altenatives?

DISM is what I use all the time.

 

[Sky-Knight]

DISM is what I use all the time.

And once again I point out... that DISM is not a chkdsk replacement, nor is it any sort of comparable tool.

 

[GTP]

How? [And that's a serious query as to what it is you do, not snark].

Crystaldisk and or manufacturer’s hard drive diagnostic utility

@nlinecomputers answered for me.
But yes, I use either the manufacturers utility, CDI or GsmartControl.

 

[britechguy]

@nlinecomputers answered for me.
But yes, I use either the manufacturers utility, CDI or GsmartControl.

And I thank you both. I've long ago learned that there are tons of tricks out there I might never learn unless I ask. That wasn't the case here, but it was still worth asking.

 

[GTP]

Is it just me or does Windows routinely have a problem letting go of USB external drives? I can almost always eject USB flash media from within Windows but rarely will Windows let go of an external USB drive. I either have to repeatedly ask for the USB drive to be disconnected or shut down the machine before unplugging the drive.

It's not just you. I get so frustrated with this BS sometimes especially if I'm at a clients and want to leave. I either have to wait for the drive to eject or shutdown as you mentioned.

 

[GTP]

I used to just pull the plug and go (after letting things idle for awhile) but I got too many media errors which were usually only resolved with chkdsk. (Hence part of this thread's discussion) Now I'll wait for Windows to tell me I can pull it and just shut down if it doesn't give me the all clear.

Yes, this ^^
I've lost too many drives to do it again. It's hit and miss if chkdsk is able to fix it too.
A lot of the time the USB is a bin job.

 

[HCHTech]

Is it just me or does Windows routinely have a problem letting go of USB external drives?

I have found that many (well, maybe several) AV programs now automatically scan any USB device that is plugged in, and you CAN'T cancel that scan for some reason. So until the scan finishes, the drive will report as in use, and you can't eject it. This fact is what pushed me over the edge to just yank them out, after a suitable short waiting period if I was copying a file to or from the drive.

 

[Markverhyden]

I used to just pull the plug and go (after letting things idle for awhile) but I got too many media errors which were usually only resolved with chkdsk. (Hence part of this thread's discussion) Now I'll wait for Windows to tell me I can pull it and just shut down if it doesn't give me the all clear.

I've had plenty of times where the popup for safe to remove comes up and I still might get a chkdsk error next time it put it into a Windows machine. But this seemed more prevalent back in the XP days.