Talk:CHKDSK

Microsoft Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Windows: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Computing: Software Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

Different CHKDSK versions

there are different versions. originally chkdsk was a DOS thing, then changed to scandisk ,then back to chkdsk. should this major section be called "Windows XP" or "Windows NT"? 141.155.28.92 00:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Using the Chkdsk command in Windows

In many old Windows manuals, I am told not to run Chkdsk /f while inside Windows.

Honestly, what's going to happen if I do that? (I couldn't find out for myself now.)--Kylohk 11:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know, but it seems to me after a lot of googling that it's unsafe to run chkdsk on reboot or something, but I'm not sure... WinterSpw (talk) 05:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing is dedicated to explaining the results of a chkdsk log performed in vista. There is stuff about EA records, reparse records, USN journals.......all of which are not mentioned here, please tell us what these mean.

It should be made clear that CHKDSK is not a data recovery tool, and should not be run if a drive contains valuable data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.157.112 (talk) 11:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please include the three stages of file varification that take place when using chkdsk. ThnkU User:Jakebnda 09:08, 3 March 2008

Please include details about how the scheduling of disk at next bootup works (e.g. how and were entries are made which trigger chkdsk at boot time)! Thx Musterstudent (talk) 13:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CHKDSK and recovery console

CHKDSK of the recovery console can not be invoced with the /f option. However, it can be invoced using the /p option which is not available for CHKDSK of the CMD command line prompt. Interestingly, after CHKDKS /P indentifies errors on the drive that can be fixed by CHKDSK /F it seems to shedule CHKDSK /F for the resepective drive for the next regular boot. I could not find any documentatiion about this, can this behaviour be confirmed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.60.112.134 (talk) 09:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Command line flags

What happened to the information about /f and /r command line flags?? 71.167.69.224 (talk) 18:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, would someone be able to add some information regarding the /b flag that is available with Windows Vista? I would add it, but I'm afraid I don't know enough to be a credible source. Thanks! Cat1205123 (talk) 06:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you know or can find a third-party source, just add <ref></ref>. WP:V is not about the credibility of the Wikipedia editor; it is about the credibility of the source used (most people will never see who made a certain edit).--Jorfer (talk) 14:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, by "credible source", I mean that I probably don't know enough to make it accurate or correct. :P Cat1205123 (talk) 16:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has asked, does this mean that everyone else understands the explanation of the /X switch? What does it mean to say that "the volume is dismounted first and all open handles become invalid." Could someone explain this in plain English???? And, what in the heck does the /X switch do after the volume is dimounted, since it must do this first before it does whatever it does? Hello! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.80.152 (talk) 18:56, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disk cleanup redirect?

Hey, why does disk cleanup redirect to the CHKDSK page?

From my understanding they are totally different utilities.

XDnet.co.uk Putting the personal touch back into the web! (talk) 17:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Disk cleaner redirects here...Disk Cleanup did not...I just fixed that...just an oversight by someone.--Jorfer (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bad sectors

>CHKDSK is the use of the Command-line/R parameter, which allows the program to repair damage it finds on the hard drive.

This is wrong, CHKDSK doesn't repair damage it copies data in bad sector AND replaces unreadable part of bad sector with zeros. Some data will be lost. Bold textIt is not tool for recovering the critical data.

87.226.26.236 (talk) 23:19, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Big comment at the top to remove the useful part of the article???

Is there a law that says that wikipedia can't be useful? If the correct solution is to go to another website, then maybe you should just put in a redirect, so we can go to the useful place and skip wikipedia altogether. That would be far more helpful to most users.70.113.72.73 (talk) 19:35, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 7/NTFS memory problem

chkdsk x: /r /f (x: can be replaced qith any driveletter except c:, but the partiton has to be bigger than your RAM size) uses a lot of memory in Windows 7 on NTFS volumes (so much that it takes all free memory and even forcces other tasks into pagefile). This can lead to crashes if you use it without a pagefile and even with a (small) pagefile if you start any new tab or only open a new window or tab or do qnything else that increases the memory usage of your applications. This behaviour of chkdsk /r /f does not occur on FAT32 or exFAT volumes. According to MS it is a feature and not a bug because it speeds up the scan a little and they assume that you don't use the system for other things anyway while running chkdsk x: /r /f, but it is known tl cause a lot of problems, so imho it should be mentioned here. --MrBurns (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MrBurns

I have lot to say about the merit, but first things, first: Could you please show us a source?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:47, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2] --MrBurns (talk) 15:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Yes, I remember now. Here is the Ed Bott's blog post: [3]

And actually, it was Bott who said "it’s arguably a feature, not a bug" and "the likelihood that you’ll ever crash a system this way is very, very small and completely avoidable".

I'll add this later tonight.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File system consistency > data loss

It should be mentioned that CHKDSK deletes readable files without warning or user's choice. It doesn't show the file path of file entries it changes or removes, just filenames and MFT id numbers. It makes the filesystem consistent but doesn't care about data loss.

This program is potentially dangerous for the user's data and shouldn't be run without a file backup onto another partition.

Once it starts running automatically at boot time and you missed the 10 seconds countdown to abort, you can only watch helplessly when it begins deleting file after file. There is no safe way to stop it. Some people reported it ran continuously for several days.

Let a Windows 7 CHKDSK "correct" a Windows XP NTFS partition and the latter doesn't work anymore due to missing system files and changes of security descriptors.

If you ask Microsoft support, they tell you the CHKDSK log can be found in the event viewer. They don't tell you that it is truncated there at 16kB and the full log file is in "System Volume Information" (Windows 7), a hidden directory no admin is allowed to read by default. 185.44.151.5 (talk) 09:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you can read files in the "System Volume Information" if you are a user with administrator rights in Win 7. I don't know if it might be protected by UAC by default, but UAC does not hinder you from doing something, it is just annoying. --MrBurns (talk) 23:37, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]