file size in disk analysis

Wheels3572 · Post by **Wheels3572** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:05 pm

the file size for large files does not appear to be correct in the disk analysis program. I am comparing it to what i see in windows file explorer. files smaller than 1 or 2 GB seem ok.

I am using a SATA 160GB dirve on xp.

Is there some setting I may have wrong? Or is there another way to fix this?

Jeff

Post by **Aneesh** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:47 pm

I tried to simulate your problem. I used < 1 GB, over 1 GB and upto 4 GB sized files. 'Disk analysis' showed correct sizes, same as that showed by Windows explorer.

I'm using a SATA 80 GB HDD (FAT32 partition) with WinXP SP2.

Can you give us the size of such a file you have which shows different size on Disk analysis and Windows explorer ? Also, which partition type are you using ?

xxsugar · Post by **xxsugar** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:53 am

I've been trying ACE Utilities and I am having the same problem.

Files over 4GB are reported as approx. 3.8GB by Disk Analysis.

All my drives are NTFS.

One file is reported as 7.77 GB (8,352,215,040 bytes) by the properties in Windows Explorer and as 3.8GB in he Disk Analysis panels.

The size of the folder the file is also missing the 4GB according to Disk Analysis.

Post by **Aneesh** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:58 am

hmm, FAT32 has a 4 GB limit for a file, I think. Anything over 4 GB can cause a problem since the datatype used to compute the file size has the max value of 2^32 ( i.e., 4 GB). Acelogix team will try to fix this asap.

xxsugar · Post by **xxsugar** » Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:16 pm

Yes,the issue seemed to be related to Fat32 limit to me also.

The field length could be handle by 2 bits to indicate the magnitude; 0 = bytes, 1 = KB, 2 = MB, 3 = GB.

Well, I am sure you known what you are doing from what I have seen of your product.

jazzbodepew · Post by **jazzbodepew** » Tue Jul 26, 2005 12:16 am

Along with the FAT32 limit could there also be a limit imposed by the BIOS? I believe some machines require the BIOS to be upgraded for WinXP to run optimally.
I can see it for some dual boot situations but;
Why do you want to use the FAT32 file system instead of NTFS,with WInXP?

jazz......................

xxsugar · Post by **xxsugar** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:24 pm

jazzbodepew

What part of "All my drives are NTFS" don't you understand?

Post by **hari** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 3:57 am

Hardric,

We will fix the error on the next upgrade

Post by **hari** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 12:32 pm

Hardric,

Can you check if

http://www.acelogix.com/downloads/au_beta.exe

shows the file sizes correctly ?

xxsugar · Post by **xxsugar** » Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:06 am

Yes, it shows the correct files and folder sizes.

Thanks

jazzbodepew · Post by **jazzbodepew** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 3:54 am

Hardric
I am a little dense sometimes..
So when you say they are all NTFS ...
Oh I get it now....
I was postulating it may be something to do with the ACPI level..
I was looking at Aneeshs' post responding to your post on that one..
I reckon Aneesh needs FAT32 partition for "experimental" purposes or what eh?

Well time to freeze my hard drive for the night..
I heard data keeps longer that way..

jazz...................

Software Forum

file size in disk analysis

file size in disk analysis

Re: file size in disk analysis

BIOS limiting?

whoops