| |
Data validation
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Validation is not available during image recovery
process. Image recovery process utilizes some algorithms derived from the
validation routines, thus introducing an undesired bias into the validation results. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- The most
significant is that the validation process can not substitute human review, because
there is no way a program can distinguish e.g. between the latest (useful) and
older (worthless) versions of the file.
- On top of that, typical validator does not "truly" read the file.
When possible, validator will skim along the file touching and verifying several
key points in the file. This is presumed the most fruitful approach because of the
following two reasons:
- Validation of some file formats requires excessive computation effort,
which would be impractical unless your other computer is Cray.
- There are way too many file formats out there. Some of these file
formats are fairly complicated. Full-blown reader implementations for all
these file formats would just be cost-prohibitive.
- Some files are in fact a combination of two separate file formats. For
example, a self-extracting archive consists of the decompression module
executable file immediately followed by the compressed archive data. For such
files, the format is checked as specified by the file extension (in the above
example the executable module will be checked, rather than compressed data).
- Some files would be different format from what their extensions suggest. For
example, some files left from the older days have .DOC extension but are in fact
plain text. The validator may try to verify these files as Microsoft Word
format, which is obviously not the case. This will trigger false "validation
failure" indication.
- Not all file formats are supported. Refer to
the full
list of the file formats supported by the validation engine for
details.
|
|
|
|
|
That said, the validation result should be taken with a grain of salt as a
rough approximation of final recovery quality. |
|
| |
| |
Copyright © 2001-2008 Zero Assumption Recovery
[Data recovery forum]
There are currently 104 visitors browsing the site.
|
|
|
|
|
Nightly discount in effect
1 hour 54 min left
What I know about ZAR is in my case, it worked.
It's interface is clean, uncluttered, and looks pretty neat.
Maybe Im just a bit fat computer programmer geek missing the days of the DOS
Defrag Utility (you know what I mean huh?).
Ok, its €50, but in my case, it's €50 well spent, as Im sure I'll find other things to torture.
Nah, if something works, i`m happy to pay for it - I use TheBat!
for email rather than a fooked up M$ freebie with more security holes than a lacy blanket.
| |
