chkdsk

[a2jam]

When I run chkdsk, I usually let it finish despite users complaint for taking so long and it takes days to finish. One of the reasons I gave users is that stopping chkdsk while in progress creates even more corruption. To be honest, I got this idea from the people I used to work with and I am trying to find out if it is true or not. so my question is what are the risks involved stopping a chkdsk before it finish.

I use /f /x /r commands with chkdsk

Thanks

 

[itsp1965]

First of all, why are you running chkdsk? The only reason to run it is if you are experiencing a disk issue (as indicated by the system event logs) Otherwise there is no reason to run it
Also NEVER run chkdsk during the day when users on the system because most definitely this would lead to corruption when users are attempting to work on files at the same time as you are executing chkdsk
If you want to run maintenance on your disk, you should be scheduling a disk defrag instead
As for the advice you got regarding this, did they ever tell you why they would need to run chkdsk on a constant basis?

 

[a2jam]

thanks for the input....but ofcourse i am runnning chkdsk because of corrupt files...and backing up data with corrupted files is a nightmare. I am talking about 2 TB of LUNs with 4 kb of small files....you get the idea....it takes about 4-5 days depending on how bad the volume is. But the questions is what are the risks involved in stopping chkdsk before it finish

 

[itsp1965]

First you need to identify what is causing the corruption in the first place. You have 2TB LUNs with a lot of small files. Are these files constantly being deleted and new ones created or are the same files being constantly overwritten? What are these small files part of.. an application?
Stopping chkdsk prob works the same as stopping a defrag, if the job is not commplete you may have corrupted something else by not completing the task