ZAR data recovery forum

ZAR data recovery forum (
-   ZAR (
-   -   Question about recovered files from broken ICH9R RAID5 (

tomslv 7th September 2008 11:04

Question about recovered files from broken ICH9R RAID5

Maybe this question is already answered before, so I apologize if so.

After I scanned through my broken ICH9R RAID5 I found a lot of files with red mark, meaning that they are presumably broken. However I did the copy procedure for all files and checked several mp3 and jpg files that were reported as damaged, but they actually are OK.

So, since I have more than 10000 red marked files, do I have to check every recovered file to be sure that it is actually OK or no, as ZAR says that they are broken.

Also I do not understand one thing.
I had one pretty large folder along with another folders within a folder in the partition root. ZAR found full file and folder structure of the root folder but that large folder within the root folder is missing. I found that all the folder is found as fragments and LostDir's, so the Folder inner structure is lost. When I tried to connect all 4 drives to ICH9R controller (motherboard actually) I could still access that particular folder and even copy out some files and they are working. So why ZAR cannot see what is still usable even in normal way?

And the last thing about save states. When I try to load saved state it always says that it cannot identify 1 or 2 drives. Does it mean that I cannot use the save state for recovery and I have to do a time consuming rescan again?

Thank You in advance!



Alexey V. Gubin 8th September 2008 11:59

Re: Question about recovered files from broken ICH9R RAID5
Yes, you have to check every recovered file to see if it valid. Color markings are "estimation" only, prone to errors. You may find this explanation helpful -
Also, if you email me couple of samples which are "red" but actually OK, I'll check if we can fix the code to assign colors correctly.

I find it surprising that something is accessible but ZAR does not see it. Is it possible that there is another copy of the same data buried somewhere in the folder tree?

If you fiddle with the disk configuration (i.e. add/remove good disks), or even add/remove memory cards (they are also a part of disk configuration), ZAR senses this and it is announced on load. However, if all the array members are found OK, then it is OK to use the save file.

tomslv 8th September 2008 22:57

Re: Question about recovered files from broken ICH9R RAID5
Hello, Alexey!

Files I checked were mp3 and jpg, so I can send You them, just say where to send.

In the begining I had one drive reported as bad for RAID0, and when I marked it as normal it started rebuild process for RAID5 on 4 drives in total. Rebuild crashed on about 20% with reporting another drive to be down for RAID5. Since I found that the cause was the wires, not the drives, maybe it is reasonable to try withou the first failed drive. I am not sure how exactly RAID5 rebuild works, but I suppose that maybe that first failed drive is really with unusable data, but the second failed drive is actually good. Maybe that is confusing ZAR? The only thing is that the scanning process on 3 of 4 drives takes a lot longer time.

How do You think? Would it be reasonable to try this scenario?

Thank You!


Alexey V. Gubin 9th September 2008 01:45

Re: Question about recovered files from broken ICH9R RAID5
Send to
This mailbox accepts 10MB files max.
One sample of each type should be enough.

Yes. Reasonable to try with three drives to see if it can rebuild the RAID5 itself.
For this, get the 46th build.
It has "lot longer time" issue addressed. Now it is not a "lot longer" but more like "50% longer".

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:39.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Zero Assumption Software