Jump to content
Piriform Community Forums


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Augeas

  1. Length of time for deep scan?

    Well, that must be a relief. You have to be adnired for sticking at it. Files found with a deep scan (those with [01234].ext name) can't be ordered by folder structure as that info is held in the MFT, which the deep scan bypasses. Good luck with the sort.
  2. Length of time for deep scan?

    You certainly get the prize for perseverance.
  3. Length of time for deep scan?

    This is phemonenally long for (I have to disagree with Nergal) what is nowdays such a small drive. I have a 256 gb drive with 80+ gb free and a very old PC and a deep scan takes about 40 minutes. So a 500 gb drive should take - lets be very generous - three hours or so. The USB connection will probably slow the process down, but I don't know by how much. Not six days, that's taking the micky. I don't know what Recuva is doing internally, it should be reading each unused cluster and searching for a recognisable file header, then building some sort of tables in memory. That's not too onerous. It seems that for some drives, or some conditions of a drive, it gets into a loop. Can it really do mass multiple reads on many clusters before moving on? Maybe, but six days?
  4. I am now seeing the slim version (along with the installer and portable) on the builds page via both the http and https urls. Hopefully this has now been resolved. But it begs the question posited by the O/P in this thread, why is the builds page effectively hidden, as there is no link to it from Piriform's site?
  5. H, yes, on first try the direct link to the slim version opened a pure white page and a separate download box (don't know what the tech name is for them) for the slim version. Now all I get is a blank page.
  6. The builds page opens but does not show the slim version. When I first tried the direct link to the slim version 30 mins ago a blank page opened along with a download box which seemed to be fine. Now when I try it again all I get is a blank page.
  7. Well, I've refreshed (ctl-F5) the builds page, run CC, restarted my pc, turned Defender off and on, and still no slim version in sight.
  8. Win 8, FireFox Quantum 58.0.2, Windows Defender.
  9. Good Heavens no. Do you see the slim version on the builds page?
  10. I see no slim version on the builds page.
  11. I've just tried my link again as in post 4 and it works fine. If the download is location or virus checker dependent then why did I download it OK, then not OK, then OK again?
  12. Recuva recovers files to wherever you specify. It will not replace them where they were. They should be recovered to a separate folder on a different drive from the source drive.
  13. That's strange. It quite quickly diverts to https://www.ccleaner.com/ now, but it didn't when I posted the above. I downloaded the slim version quite easily. In fact I played with the url and replaced slim with portable, and that worked and still works (but for how long, I wonder?). I also wonder if someone is working late at Piriform. These url's are timing out now. I don't know what's going on. I just wish Piriform would say what they're doing and put an end to all this nonsense.
  14. Try https://www.ccleaner.com/ccleaner/download/slim
  15. Yes, encrypt the file. There are plenty of free encryption applications available. I use TrueCrypt for my password file, which - despite it's abandonment by the developers recently - is still uncrackable by any normal means and is easy to use. Easier than all this copying, editing, printing, writing to dvd, deleting, wiping free space, and you're still ending up with a printed copy, the most insecure security.
  16. Files can't be renamed before recovery. Just reciover them to a new separate folder on a different device, and all will be safe. You can then rename them to your heart's content.
  17. File size limitation

    It's difficult to see how that occurs. A deep scan will look at deleted clusters until a known file signature is found, then recover the following clusters until another file signature, or a live file, or some end of file indicator, is found. In theory there's no way a sequence of clusters greater than the free space on the disk can be requested. So if that's the message you're getting then I'm out of ideas.
  18. File size limitation

    Deep scan runa a normal scan first, so tis might be the big files you are finding and having the same space problem with. Deep Scan files have a numerical file name, such as [01234].ext. They will only be one extent and should not give any problem with space (i.e. they will require just as much as there are clusters i the extent). Look for these file names with large sizes (sort the size column).
  19. Is This Normal for a Deep Scan?

    Files found with a deep scan will have names as [01234].ext. They will not have their proper file names nor will they be able to be sorted into folder order, as this information comes from the MFT, which a deep scan more or less bypasses. Are you SOL? If I knew what that meant I might be able to guess. I'm quite confused by 'I don't need anything I deleted'.
  20. CCleaner Sloooow

    Do you mean that Wipe Free Space in Cleaner is checked? If so, then a drive has to be selected in Options/Settings for this to come into effect. The default for this is WFS unchecked and no drive checked. If you mean that a drive is checked in Options/Settings then WFS in Cleaner has to checked for this to be effective. As the defaults are unchecked then if both are checked then at some time some human intervention was required to make the change. Yes, wiping free space takes a lot of time, and produces an operation complete message. As your run times are about four minutes then I very much doubt that WFS is running. My normal cleaning run staggers a little at 46 seconds, but is over in around ten seconds or so. That cleans around 2-300 mb on average.
  21. File size limitation

    There is no size limitation as far as I know. However when a file larger than 4gb is deleted in an NTFS system then there are changes to the file's record in the MFT. The file size and end cluster number are set to zeroes/FF's. If the file is in many extents then any extension records in the MFT will have the data cluster addresses set to zero/FF's. This causes the not-quite-accurate error message. These 4k+ files are to all intents and purposes unrecoverable. They may still exist on the storage device but unless they are in one single extent then patching multiple extents together is impossible without professional help. A deep scan will show whether there are files of 20gb+ found. If so then recover those and see what you have. Otherwise it's back to the previous paragraph.
  22. Regular old ASCII only suports Latin characters, and half the world uses some other script. I'm no expert, but to quote Wikip ' UTF-16 is used for text in the OS API in Microsoft Windows 2000 onwards', and ' UTF-16 is the native internal representation of text in the Microsoft Windows NT', which is the same thing I guess. So UTF-16 is what Windows uses. The duplicate file txt output has a byte order marker of FF FE indicating that it is little endian. Wikip again '... the application is expected to figure out what encoding to use when reading text data.' The duplicate file txt output is openable by Notepad, which reads the byte order marker amd interprets accordingly. I don't know why Cygwin can't do the same. I think that the bug lies with an application with a name beginning with one C.
  23. Help problem with drive wiper

    Driove Wiper will delete these files when it's finished. It's the way that wiping a drive works.
  24. Recovering large MKV-files

    Although you ran a deep scan the info (very handy, I wish everyone would do this) shows details returned by a normal scan (Recuva runs a normal scan before a deep scan). A file found during a deep scan has no file or folder name, and only one primary extent. The info here is taken from the entry in the MFT. The file header seems to have the correct four-byte signature for an MKV file. I can't say whether the rest is valid, but I would assume that if the file signature is intact then it's likely that the rest of that cluster is intact also. But I could be wrong, of course. There are enough clusters to make up 3gb too. The file header comes from the start of the first data cluster. With TRIM enabled the deleted data clusters should have been cleared. Is TRIM enabled on this drive? Apart from that I'm running out of ideas. After around byte 140 or so the header is zeroes. Is this relevant? Is the rest of the file like this? I don't know. Ultimately Recuva will just recover - copy in other words - whatever is in the allocated clusters, so there's no tweak to do it any better.
  25. Wipe Free Space on SSD discs?

    Safe? Well, it's very unlikely that you will die. It is however pointless as you cannot physically overwrite a nand flash page. You will also force the SSD to do a huge and unecessary amount of page writes and deletions, which is a waste of time, electricity and a little bit of the SSD's life. That's why you are getting the warning. With TRIM enabled you should find very few deleted files using, for instance, Recuva. Those that are found will be mainly small files held in the MFT, which wipe free space will not remove anyway. A far better process it to run an occasional defrag Optimise, which will TRIM any deleted pages it finds.