error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !. Discuss error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !, on Wireless Forums.
error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Hi,
Got a big big problem :
I'm working on FM radio Station.
We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so that
we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens ....
Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
This app uses a special method of disk writing :
is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15 hours,
thats it) ..
The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
"temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And if
i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small files is
enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
Thats awfull !!!
All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors of
the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems to
repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy / cut
the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
I'm confused.
So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?
Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
I really don't know.
Hope someone can help ...
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
"Setup.exe" <nobody4@free.fr> wrote in message
news:4fed88be$0$6823$426a74cc@news.free.fr...
> Hi,
>
> Got a big big problem :
> I'm working on FM radio Station.
> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so that we
> can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens ....
> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>
> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15 hours,
> thats it) ..
>
> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying "temporary
> file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And if i analyse the
> temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small files is enough to
> destroy all the archive saving process ..
>
> Thats awfull !!!
>
> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors of
> the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
You could try asking for your money back, that might get a response.
I would try sending a polite email to every email address you can find on
their website, asking for assistance.
> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems to
> repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy / cut
> the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
Whilst chkdsk is good, you can often get an idea of whether there might be
disk related errors by looking in the System event log - run up event viewer
and them skim through the System event log. Ignore information and warning
messages, and (for now) any errors that aren't disk related. I suspect there
won't be but if there are any disk related errors recorded then that would
indicate a hardware related issue somewhere.
The next time you get an error, go straight to the system event log and have
a look to see if anything has been reported there.
> I'm confused.
> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster size,
> and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk writing
> process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
Whilst I haven't use this software or experienced these specific errors, I
have encounted odd errors before now with a variety of applications which
generate files and which are long running. This might be a red-herring, but
I wonder whether disk fragmentation might be an issue - either disk
fragmentation or directory fragmentation. Given that the individual files
are probably quite small (4MB ish?) then I doubt file fragmentation is an
issue, but I wonder whether directory fragmentation might be a problem?
Could you download contig from http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/s.../bb897428.aspx and then at
the command line do
contig <temp-path>
and, just for completeness
contig -s <temp-path>
The first will defrag the directory entry, the second the files in it. Most
normal disk defragmenters won't defragment the directory entry, whereas
contig will. I've seen fragmentation cause quite a few products to fail, and
it can be hard to track down - but admitedly only when its dealing with a
very large very fragmented file and not lots of small individual ones.
> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?
> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
> I really don't know.
> Hope someone can help ...
If you do get it sorted please post back what the issue and resolution were.
--
Brian Cryer http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/29/2012 4:02 PM, Brian Cryer a écrit :
> "Setup.exe" <nobody4@free.fr> wrote in message
> news:4fed88be$0$6823$426a74cc@news.free.fr...
>> Hi,
>>
>> Got a big big problem :
>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so
>> that we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens
>> ....
>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>
>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15
>> hours, thats it) ..
>>
>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
>> "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And
>> if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small
>> files is enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
>>
>> Thats awfull !!!
>>
>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors
>> of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
>
> You could try asking for your money back, that might get a response.
>
> I would try sending a polite email to every email address you can find
> on their website, asking for assistance.
I did that already, they are deaf.
Even worst, obviously their prog is totally out of date, perhaps its the
reason its fails. There is no recent upgrade. Some windows in the prog
just refer to Win98 system files, and of course that works not.
Besides, its a mess cause the app could be (or is) excellent, and i have
never seen such an equivalent
>
>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
>> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems
>> to repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy /
>> cut the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
>
> Whilst chkdsk is good, you can often get an idea of whether there might
> be disk related errors by looking in the System event log - run up event
> viewer and them skim through the System event log. Ignore information
> and warning messages, and (for now) any errors that aren't disk related.
> I suspect there won't be but if there are any disk related errors
> recorded then that would indicate a hardware related issue somewhere.
>
> The next time you get an error, go straight to the system event log and
> have a look to see if anything has been reported there.
Oh yes : tons of RED disk error : " Device bla bla has a bad bloc"
(Event 7) Ok, but when running CHKDSK, it says all is ok : no bad
sector. Would the term bad bloc" be different from "bad sector" and not
advised by the check disk log result ???
>
>> I'm confused.
>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
>> size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
>> writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
>
> Whilst I haven't use this software or experienced these specific errors,
> I have encounted odd errors before now with a variety of applications
> which generate files and which are long running. This might be a
> red-herring,
red-herring : what that means ?
but I wonder whether disk fragmentation might be an issue -
> either disk fragmentation or directory fragmentation. Given that the
> individual files are probably quite small (4MB ish?)
Even smaller : 512 kb !
then I doubt file
> fragmentation is an issue, but I wonder whether directory fragmentation
> might be a problem? Could you download contig from
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/s.../bb897428.aspx and then
> at the command line do
>
> contig <temp-path>
> and, just for completeness
> contig -s <temp-path>
>
> The first will defrag the directory entry, the second the files in it.
> Most normal disk defragmenters won't defragment the directory entry,
> whereas contig will. I've seen fragmentation cause quite a few products
> to fail, and it can be hard to track down - but admitedly only when its
> dealing with a very large very fragmented file and not lots of small
> individual ones.
As the disk is always writing (recording in fact), I'm not sure its good
the defragment it at the same time ... But I'll make my mind about this
test.
>
>> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?
>> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
>> I really don't know.
>> Hope someone can help ...
>
> If you do get it sorted please post back what the issue and resolution
> were.
Ok, thanks for the reply.
I first have to check this "bad bloc" errors ...
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
Setup.exe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Got a big big problem :
> I'm working on FM radio Station.
> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so that
> we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens ....
> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>
> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15 hours,
> thats it) ..
>
> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
> "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And if
> i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small files is
> enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
>
> Thats awfull !!!
>
> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors of
> the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
>
> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems to
> repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy / cut
> the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
>
> I'm confused.
> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
> size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
> writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
>
> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?
> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
> I really don't know.
> Hope someone can help ...
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Julien
From their web site:
Loop Recorder has 64bit support to handle recorded audio data of up to
16 GB.
Loop Recorder Pro can handle even larger amounts of audio data. With a
FAT32-filesystem it can record audio data of up to 256 GB per session
and with NTFS it is unlimited.
So you must be using their Standard version and not their Pro version.
Or have you been indefinitely using their free trial version which does
not include support?
The Pro version has the archive function, not the Standard version (and
very probably not the trial version).
Changing cluster size won't affect a defect in the 'Save' algorithm in
the program to close any files on which it has a handle. From http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_radio.php, it appears you don't just save
the recording but instead you open an editor and from there you do a
save function. http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_editor.php shows the
editor that should open when you click "Edit and Save". Are you doing
any editing before you click the Save button (disk icon in toolbar)?
Are you clicking on the "Edit and Save" button in the Loop Recording
dialog or are you instead bringing up the editor and saving from there
without first stopping the looped recording? Presumably you must first
stop recording before you start editing and then save.
What "3 errors" are you talking about (in the temp folder with the 4000
files)? What was this "analysis" you mention?
Do you really need to generate 4000 files for 15 hours of recording?
From their product description, it looks like you can create some huge-
sized audio files the limit on size depending on which file system you
use for the drive. http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_diskusage.php shows
file sizes up to about 300GB which is obviously a lot larger than your
"small files" comment. How big is your loop? Are you leaving it at the
small default of 10 minutes? Or did you up it to hours? I don't see
the program is restricted from going up to your 15 hour window but then
I cannot see the parameters you can specify when you click on Change
button for Time Settings in the Loop Recorder dialog (shown at http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_radio.php). You aren't hitting a maximum
file count limit per folder in the file system but you might be hitting
a maximum object count in the program.
Since you are talking about capturing "live" content then you're talking
about people talking on your show (you don't mention what your show airs
so maybe "live" content is local talent coming into your studio to play
their music). If it's just talking you want to capture, you could lower
the bitrate to reduce the size of the audio file(s). Their diskusage
web page show how much difference there is in size the audio files with
different bitrates. You never mentioned how long is the actual loop
that you are recording but having 4000 audio files sure makes it appear
you chose a small loop size. My guess is that each loop is generating
an audio file. So make the loops longer. If you think the audio files
are then getting too big then reduce the bitrate for capture.
Well, it's possible you're hitting a max file count per folder depending
on what file system you are using on the drive but which you never
mentioned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat32 has a table that shows
the maximum number of files (per folder). If you using the old FAT12
file system, the max is 4068 files per folder. You didn't even mention
which operating system you are using. So what OS and what file
system(s) within it are you using?
Are you running an anti-virus program or anything else that interrogates
the files on your computer? If so, have you tried excluding this
program's "temp" folder?
You tried all their contacts at http://www.looprecorder.de/email.php,
even the postal address (by sending your letter with signature
confirmation to prove they got it), and they didn't reply? Support
should be included in the paid product. You did pay for it, right, and
you're not just indefinitely using their trial product, right?
Personally I get suspicious of any company proliferating commercialware
that hides behind a private domain registration (their registrar is
listed as the registrant instead of the real registrant) to hide their
identity. looprecorder.de's registration shows their registrar (1and1)
as the registrant. Registrants pay extra to hide.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Setup.exe wrote:
> Le 6/29/2012 4:02 PM, Brian Cryer a écrit :
>> "Setup.exe" <nobody4@free.fr> wrote in message
>> news:4fed88be$0$6823$426a74cc@news.free.fr...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Got a big big problem :
>>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so
>>> that we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens
>>> ....
>>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>>
>>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15
>>> hours, thats it) ..
>>>
>>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
>>> "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And
>>> if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small
>>> files is enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
>>>
>>> Thats awfull !!!
>>>
>>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors
>>> of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
>>
>> You could try asking for your money back, that might get a response.
>>
>> I would try sending a polite email to every email address you can find
>> on their website, asking for assistance.
>
> I did that already, they are deaf.
> Even worst, obviously their prog is totally out of date, perhaps its the
> reason its fails. There is no recent upgrade. Some windows in the prog
> just refer to Win98 system files, and of course that works not.
>
> Besides, its a mess cause the app could be (or is) excellent, and i have
> never seen such an equivalent
>
>>
>>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
>>> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems
>>> to repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy /
>>> cut the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
>>
>> Whilst chkdsk is good, you can often get an idea of whether there might
>> be disk related errors by looking in the System event log - run up event
>> viewer and them skim through the System event log. Ignore information
>> and warning messages, and (for now) any errors that aren't disk related.
>> I suspect there won't be but if there are any disk related errors
>> recorded then that would indicate a hardware related issue somewhere.
>>
>> The next time you get an error, go straight to the system event log and
>> have a look to see if anything has been reported there.
>
> Oh yes : tons of RED disk error : " Device bla bla has a bad bloc"
> (Event 7) Ok, but when running CHKDSK, it says all is ok : no bad
> sector. Would the term bad bloc" be different from "bad sector" and not
> advised by the check disk log result ???
>
>>
>>> I'm confused.
>>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
>>> size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
>>> writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
>>
>> Whilst I haven't use this software or experienced these specific errors,
>> I have encounted odd errors before now with a variety of applications
>> which generate files and which are long running. This might be a
>> red-herring,
>
> red-herring : what that means ?
>
> but I wonder whether disk fragmentation might be an issue -
>> either disk fragmentation or directory fragmentation. Given that the
>> individual files are probably quite small (4MB ish?)
>
> Even smaller : 512 kb !
>
>
> then I doubt file
>> fragmentation is an issue, but I wonder whether directory fragmentation
>> might be a problem? Could you download contig from
>> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/s.../bb897428.aspx and then
>> at the command line do
>>
>> contig <temp-path>
>> and, just for completeness
>> contig -s <temp-path>
>>
>> The first will defrag the directory entry, the second the files in it.
>> Most normal disk defragmenters won't defragment the directory entry,
>> whereas contig will. I've seen fragmentation cause quite a few products
>> to fail, and it can be hard to track down - but admitedly only when its
>> dealing with a very large very fragmented file and not lots of small
>> individual ones.
>
> As the disk is always writing (recording in fact), I'm not sure its good
> the defragment it at the same time ... But I'll make my mind about this
> test.
>>
>>> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?
>>> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
>>> I really don't know.
>>> Hope someone can help ...
>>
>> If you do get it sorted please post back what the issue and resolution
>> were.
>
> Ok, thanks for the reply.
> I first have to check this "bad bloc" errors ...
>
The Sense Code is in the numeric information stored in the Event. You
convert the numbers, into a text string, to gain a better understanding
of the error type.
*******
Download HDTune (version is good enough for this purpose)
The display may already indicate (by red/yellow/green colors), there is a
problem. Some of the yellow indicators are not truthful - do not panic
immediately, if the display has some colors. Even my brand new drives,
have yellow entries that should be ignored.
Check "Reallocated Sector Count" first. The first line of numbers, is
from a brand new Seagate hard drive. The second line of numbers, is
from my failing Seagate 500GB drive. The second line is meant to indicate
what a degradation of the hard drive looks like. First, the Data value
rises, and when it gets high enough, the columns on the left start
to decrement. The left hand column is an indication of useful life, as
in there is "98 %" of life in terms of reallocation of sectors.
Current Worst Threshold Data Status
100 100 36 0 OK
98 98 36 104 OK
It would seem, in this case, that "Data" is the raw count. The columns
on the left, changed from 100 to 98, the day that Data passed the 100
mark. I interpret this trend to mean that the "total life" of the drive
is roughly (100-36)/(100-98) * 104 = 3328 reallocated sectors. My disk
is still "OK" as far as the status indicator is concerned, and the color
will change when the "Data" column hits greater than roughly 3200. It
took a bad drive, for me to get a demonstration of how it works.
The second indication is "Current Pending Sector". The status here, has
not changed for me, since I purchased the drive. Current Pending Sector
is a queue of sectors that need correction by the controller card. It
seems on my drive, that the queue never grows, and when a problem
occurs on the drive (on write), it is fixed immediately. This queue
is supposed to grow, when a read failure occurs, and the sector is
scheduled for repair, on the next write operation. The "Data" column
will return to zero, when the sector is processed and reallocated
or not. A write attempt for the sector is needed, before it can
be repaired. A sudden increase in "Data" here, could happen just
before the "Reallocated" starts to grow.
Current Worst Threshold Data Status
100 100 0 0 OK
In terms of health of the drive, and safety of the data, I replace
the hard drive, as soon as "Reallocated Sector Count" and the
Data column value is no longer 0. My drive still has not failed,
and has been running for about a week after the Data column showed
a problem.
But hard drives can cease to function, very quickly, so the problem
should not be ignored. Make a backup copy of the contents of the
hard drive, on a second disk somewhere. Like you would, for normal
backup procedures for the computer. Then, if the drive fails completely,
you can restore anything you need.
There is a "level of dishonesty" about "Reallocated Sector Count".
When the drive leaves the factory, there can be 500,000 reallocated
sectors on the drive. And the "Data" column would show 0. The manufacturer
does not want you to know, about the level of factory defects.
So the statistic is skewed, and is likely not completely linear.
As users, we cannot tell, whether my example of "104" above, is
104 actual sectors, or some other number (i.e. scaled math).
*******
If the disk drive has a problem, then the software designers at
looprecorder.de are not guilty. They cannot assume a defective drive,
and use QuickPar to try to improve the error rate. It's not a valid
design objective. It would be a valid objective, for a space craft
flying through space, where storage devices could fail while the
space craft is in flight. Here on Earth, we replace disk drives
when they become defective. I have replaced my disk drive, within
the last week, because of problems.
When "Reallocated Sector Count" grows, the peak write rate of the
hard drive, will fall. Performance will be "choppy". If the drive
takes 15 seconds to complete a write operation, because of bad sectors,
recording samples from looprecorder could be lost.
*******
If you wish to test another recording application, there is
Audacity from audacity.sourceforge.net.
It can be configured, to write sound samples into files, for
later analysis. If you suspect looprecorder is not functioning
well, that might be a free alternative.
*******
The Windows built-in Sound Recorder, stores recorded sound in
system RAM. And the recording duration is limited by available
RAM.
Other recording programs, may initially store sound in RAM,
and then transfer blocks of data into files on the file system.
There should in fact, be plenty of time to resolve write problems
to the disk, due to the large buffer space provided by system
RAM. But it could be, that an error code, returned after a 15 second
attempt to write, causes the recording program to throw away
that segment of recorded data. And then, you see a corresponding
Event Viewer entry, for the failure that the operating system logged.
Summary: Get a new hard drive.
Replace the existing drive, before it fails.
You can use the old drive as a backup device, but knowing
it could fail at any time, and cannot be "trusted".
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
On 6/29/2012 6:51 AM, Setup.exe wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Got a big big problem :
> I'm working on FM radio Station.
> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops,
> infinitly, so that we can save our work if needed - if
> something good, live, happens ....
> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>
> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files
> (for 15 hours, thats it) ..
>
> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes,
> saying "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk
> truncated".. And if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3
> errors in the 4000 small files is enough to destroy all the
> archive saving process ..
>
> Thats awfull !!!
>
> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from
> the authors of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach
> them since years ...
>
> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog,
> and I offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors,
> besides it seems to repair some small errors (It brings less
> errors in trying to copy / cut the temp to rebuild a part of
> the lost recordings)
>
> I'm confused.
> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger
> cluster size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for
> a HEAVY disk writing process ? - don't forget the prog is
> running 24/7/365
>
> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?.
> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
> I really don't know.
> Hope someone can help ...
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Julien
>
You really should be running a better checking program than
chkdsk. I would suggest SpinRite. If there are any disk
problems it will find them. http://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
>
> There is an article here for "bad block" Event 7.
>
> http://www.symantec.com/business/sup...t&id=TECH16938
>
> The Sense Code is in the numeric information stored in the Event. You
> convert the numbers, into a text string, to gain a better understanding
> of the error type.
>
> *******
>
> Download HDTune (version is good enough for this purpose)
>
> http://www.hdtune.com/files/hdtune_255.exe
>
> Install it, and then run it. Select the recording disk drive from the menu.
>
> Then, click the "Health" tab.
>
> The disk drive "Health" is reported by the SMART statistics system
> on the hard drive.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.M.A.R.T.
>
> The display may already indicate (by red/yellow/green colors), there is a
> problem. Some of the yellow indicators are not truthful - do not panic
> immediately, if the display has some colors. Even my brand new drives,
> have yellow entries that should be ignored.
>
> Check "Reallocated Sector Count" first. The first line of numbers, is
> from a brand new Seagate hard drive. The second line of numbers, is
> from my failing Seagate 500GB drive. The second line is meant to indicate
> what a degradation of the hard drive looks like. First, the Data value
> rises, and when it gets high enough, the columns on the left start
> to decrement. The left hand column is an indication of useful life, as
> in there is "98 %" of life in terms of reallocation of sectors.
>
> Current Worst Threshold Data Status
>
> 100 100 36 0 OK
>
> 98 98 36 104 OK
>
> It would seem, in this case, that "Data" is the raw count. The columns
> on the left, changed from 100 to 98, the day that Data passed the 100
> mark. I interpret this trend to mean that the "total life" of the drive
> is roughly (100-36)/(100-98) * 104 = 3328 reallocated sectors. My disk
> is still "OK" as far as the status indicator is concerned, and the color
> will change when the "Data" column hits greater than roughly 3200. It
> took a bad drive, for me to get a demonstration of how it works.
>
> The second indication is "Current Pending Sector". The status here, has
> not changed for me, since I purchased the drive. Current Pending Sector
> is a queue of sectors that need correction by the controller card. It
> seems on my drive, that the queue never grows, and when a problem
> occurs on the drive (on write), it is fixed immediately. This queue
> is supposed to grow, when a read failure occurs, and the sector is
> scheduled for repair, on the next write operation. The "Data" column
> will return to zero, when the sector is processed and reallocated
> or not. A write attempt for the sector is needed, before it can
> be repaired. A sudden increase in "Data" here, could happen just
> before the "Reallocated" starts to grow.
>
> Current Worst Threshold Data Status
>
> 100 100 0 0 OK
>
> In terms of health of the drive, and safety of the data, I replace
> the hard drive, as soon as "Reallocated Sector Count" and the
> Data column value is no longer 0. My drive still has not failed,
> and has been running for about a week after the Data column showed
> a problem.
>
> But hard drives can cease to function, very quickly, so the problem
> should not be ignored. Make a backup copy of the contents of the
> hard drive, on a second disk somewhere. Like you would, for normal
> backup procedures for the computer. Then, if the drive fails completely,
> you can restore anything you need.
There is no back up to do, as the entire drive is dedicated to the temp
of the Loop Recorder. There is no other data in it, saves are made on
another drive.
>
> There is a "level of dishonesty" about "Reallocated Sector Count".
> When the drive leaves the factory, there can be 500,000 reallocated
> sectors on the drive. And the "Data" column would show 0. The manufacturer
> does not want you to know, about the level of factory defects.
> So the statistic is skewed, and is likely not completely linear.
> As users, we cannot tell, whether my example of "104" above, is
> 104 actual sectors, or some other number (i.e. scaled math).
>
> *******
>
> If the disk drive has a problem, then the software designers at
> looprecorder.de are not guilty. They cannot assume a defective drive,
> and use QuickPar to try to improve the error rate.
Of course, yes.
It's not a valid
> design objective. It would be a valid objective, for a space craft
> flying through space, where storage devices could fail while the
> space craft is in flight. Here on Earth, we replace disk drives
> when they become defective. I have replaced my disk drive, within
> the last week, because of problems.
>
> When "Reallocated Sector Count" grows, the peak write rate of the
> hard drive, will fall. Performance will be "choppy". If the drive
> takes 15 seconds to complete a write operation, because of bad sectors,
> recording samples from looprecorder could be lost.
>
> *******
>
> If you wish to test another recording application, there is
> Audacity from audacity.sourceforge.net.
>
> http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
>
> It can be configured, to write sound samples into files, for
> later analysis. If you suspect looprecorder is not functioning
> well, that might be a free alternative.
We absolutly need an automation recording in loop mode, and 15 hours
during is a minimum. Not sure its easy to get that from other software.
>
> *******
>
> The Windows built-in Sound Recorder, stores recorded sound in
> system RAM. And the recording duration is limited by available
> RAM.
>
> Other recording programs, may initially store sound in RAM,
> and then transfer blocks of data into files on the file system.
> There should in fact, be plenty of time to resolve write problems
> to the disk, due to the large buffer space provided by system
> RAM. But it could be, that an error code, returned after a 15 second
> attempt to write, causes the recording program to throw away
> that segment of recorded data. And then, you see a corresponding
> Event Viewer entry, for the failure that the operating system logged.
>
> Summary: Get a new hard drive.
> Replace the existing drive, before it fails.
> You can use the old drive as a backup device, but knowing
> it could fail at any time, and cannot be "trusted".
>
> Paul
Woh, many thanks for this significative response. Got to read it again
as I m not exactly english thinking and poor in maths understanding !
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Setup.exe wrote:
>
> Woh, many thanks for this significative response. Got to read it again
> as I m not exactly english thinking and poor in maths understanding !
>
> But, well, I knew already HD Tune and what is the SMART, so i did the
> readings, here is what it looks like :
> http://nobody4.free.fr/ZVRAC/HD_TUNE.jpg
Very interesting.
Some observations:
1) Your hard drive is too hot!
58C will ruin the hard drive.
Fit forced air cooling near the drive.
The best way to do this, is mount a fan capable of drawing cool
room air into the computer case, and have it blow directly
over the surface of the hard drive.
High temperature operation like that, will shorten the lifetime
of the hard drive motor. The lubricant inside the sealed motor,
will be forced out of the motor.
2) Reallocated sectors = 1, is not a bad number.
3) Current Pending Sectors count = 6 is more interesting.
It seems, for whatever reason, your drive may be having more problems
reading the data back later. My failing drive doesn't do that.
The thing is, since you're "loop recording", there should be many
opportunities to reduce the Current Pending Sector count, and
increase the Reallocated Sectors. But your Reallocated Sectors
is not grown significantly.
I do not know how to interpret this information, except to suggest
the high operating temperature is partially responsible. Cool off the drive.
4) Power on Hours is 14819. That's roughly 617 days of continuous
24 hour operation. Most of my drives, don't last that long here.
The customer reviews (Feedback button) for that drive, are excellent.
When it comes time to replace that hard drive with another, it will
not last nearly as long in your application.
HGST HDS722516VLAT80 Deskstar 7K250 IDE Ultra ATA100 160GB 7200 RPM
Your drive was designed some time after the IBM fiasco. IBM sold
their consumer disk division to Hitachi, after the incident described
here, and then they became HGST. And presumably, they learned from
their mistakes. I would say your 7K250 has held up well.
Mechanically, it's better if the fan is attached to the computer
case, rather than attached to the bay. Done this way, vibrations
from the fan, can interact with the disk drive.
I use an externally mounted, 120mm fan, to cool my drives. The
fan is bolted to the front of the computer, using a home-made
aluminum mounting frame. Current operating temperature of my drives
(as reported by HDTune) is 29C and 30C, and that's because it is a
summer's day. I am nowhere near 58C.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
Paul wrote:
> Setup.exe wrote:
>
>> HD Tune readings
>> http://nobody4.free.fr/ZVRAC/HD_TUNE.jpg
>
> Very interesting.
>
> Some observations:
>
> 1) Your hard drive is too hot!
>
> 58C will ruin the hard drive.
The maximum *operating* temperature (that means the sustained or
constant temperature) for the device is 55 C, so 58 C is too high but
not by a lot. Remember that HDtune is stressing the device. I doubt
the drive is working as hard to occasionally dump a buffer from the
recording application to update or append to an audio file. I'm not
sure the OP simply went into HDtune to go look at the current SMART
values or if he ran their speed tests and then looked at the SMART data.
The OP may only need to include the hard disk in the fan speed control
software so the case fan speeds up when then hard disk gets too hot.
Due to hysteresis (lag in temperature readings), I'd probably set a max
temp of 50 C at which the case fan speeds up and 55 C as the warning
temperature. If the OP's computer/OS setup didn't include thermal
monitoring and fan control, Speedfan might work (but the OP would have
to know which measurements in Speedfan were for which temperature and
fan speed sensors and then rename them so he remembers later which
measurement is for what). The specs for my WDC hard disk state its
*operating* temperature maximum is 60 C, so my thresholds are 55 and 60
(to increase case fan and to alert). If a 5 C leeway isn't enough to
get the air moving in time to keep the drive's temperature below its
maximum operating temperature, it's time to blow out the dust bunnies.
However, I typically do not pile hard disks right next to each other in
the drive cage. I like to leave space between them. Even if the case
fan's speed goes up, there's not enough space between adjacent drives to
move cooling air between them. And making sure any fat/wide cables
don't block airflow is important, too. If you can't move them out of
the way, twist them so they are inline with the airflow, not against it.
> 3) Current Pending Sectors count = 6 is more interesting.
Only if the count doesn't go down later. This is a pending value.
Sectors that happen to get a read error may not do so later. This
operation is left pending the next write operation to those sectors to
see if they're still bad. Unless you do something to write to the same
suspect sectors, they won't get retested and then determined if bad or
good. Transient errors can make a sector look bad but when later tested
it is good. Some drives include logic to do the retest when the drive
is quiescent (i.e., offline correction), some don't. I haven't really
found good info at the drive makers' site on which do and which don't.
Just because the SMART data lists the Offline Uncorrectable count
doesn't mean the drive has that logic. Some makers include SMART values
that have no value (they're worthless, not that they have a zero value).
Just look at the C2 attribute for Temperature. Uh huh, sure, the drive
is running at 1,441,850 C (or over 2 million degrees Fahrenheit).
> 4) Power on Hours is 14819. That's roughly 617 days of continuous 24
> hour operation. Most of my drives, don't last that long here.
That's not a continuous power-on reading. That's the total number of
hours that the device has been powered on. So the 14819 value could be
over 2 years of continuous use or over 10 years of interrupted use.
This value also may include (depends on the SMART value was implemented
by the maker) the low-power state of the device when its logic remains
powered but the platters aren't spinning.
The Power Cycle count is 123. According to definition, that's the count
of full on/off power cycles for the device. That won't include when the
device is in low-power mode (logic is powered but platters aren't
spinning). So, assuming the power save modes on the computer were NOT
configured to spin down the platters after some specified time if idle
activity addressed to the device, 14819 hours divided by 123 power
cycles is, on average, about 120 hours of constant up-time during each
power cycle, or about 5 days. If power saving settings on the computer
let the device spin down after being idle awhile, the "powered" state of
the device would be even shorter. Since the author says they run the
recording program in a constant loop so it is always recording then
there is probably no spin-down of the drive and we're back to the 5-day
average up-time. Of course, one power cycle might've had the hard disk
up only a few minutes while another power cycle had it for a year.
The other problem with the Power-On Hours count is that it can wildly
inaccurate. For some old drives, the value would wrap around (reset to
zero) or it would overflow (becomes all 1 bits) and start counting
downward or the value would advance in erratic increments.
Getting the operating temperature down below 55 C, or less, is probably
of primary concern to the OP. Then watch the *pending* sector count
(for remapping bad sector AFTER they still tested bad when they are next
rewritten) to see if it keeps going up or gradually drops or stays the
same.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
VanguardLH wrote:
> The maximum *operating* temperature (that means the sustained or
> constant temperature) for the device is 55 C, so 58 C is too high but
> not by a lot. Remember that HDtune is stressing the device.
Actually, that's not true. When you click the "Health" tab, none
of the other tests within HDTune can be running. If you start the program
and click no tabs, nothing happens. If you click the Health tab, the
SMART command is given and the statistics read out and displayed
on the screen. SMART is updated at regular intervals, so the
SMART command is issued in a slow polling mode.
If you were quick about it, you could issue the Benchmark command,
stop it half way, then click the Health tab, you might see some
elevated temperature from the Benchmark activity that just
finished. But you cannot run both activities simultaneously.
I think you can get a temperature reading, while you Benchmark (it
shows in the task bar), but the other SMART stats cannot be observed.
You can be running HDTune in parallel with other applications, in
which case you can be monitoring while stress is being applied. But
even then, there are limits. HDTune will not connect to disks which
are too busy. I observed this just yesterday, when testing two
brand new disks. They would not show up as choices in the HDTune
menu, as long as the other tests (with a separate program) were running.
If my other tests were stopped, then I could get HDTune to list
the disks in question.
>
>> 3) Current Pending Sectors count = 6 is more interesting.
>
> Only if the count doesn't go down later. This is a pending value.
> Sectors that happen to get a read error may not do so later.
The OP is writing continuously to the drive. Which gives no opportunity
for read errors to show up (for Pending to climb) and gives plenty of
opportunities for Pending sectors to be resolved. It's an ideal
situation in terms of making the value go down.
On my failing drive, the Pending count has stayed at zero the whole
time, while the reallocations grow on write. Which is a bit strange.
I can read-verify my failing drive, and the Pending will not go up.
But if I do fresh writes to the drive (write 500GB of video), then
I see fresh reallocations the next time I check SMART. And the whole
thing, has made a mockery of my understanding of how automatic
reallocation works. For my drive to work the way it does, implies
the read head follows behind the write head, and can observe what
has just been written (read-after-write). And how likely is that ?
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
Paul wrote:
> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> The maximum *operating* temperature (that means the sustained or
>> constant temperature) for the device is 55 C, so 58 C is too high but
>> not by a lot. Remember that HDtune is stressing the device.
>
> Actually, that's not true. When you click the "Health" tab, none
> of the other tests within HDTune can be running. If you start the program
> and click no tabs, nothing happens. If you click the Health tab, the
> SMART command is given and the statistics read out and displayed
> on the screen. SMART is updated at regular intervals, so the
> SMART command is issued in a slow polling mode.
Okay, but that doesn't preclude running the tests and then checking the
Health status. The drive would still be warmed from the tests when you
went to check on the Health. The OP didn't mention running the tests so
hopefully the Health status was for his disk in a rather idle state.
If the OP is getting 58 C without doing the HDtune testing and he didn't
doing anything disk intensive before looking at the Health status then
58 C would be extreme for a hard disk that has been sitting idle for,
say, around 20 minutes, or more.
>>> 3) Current Pending Sectors count = 6 is more interesting.
>>
>> Only if the count doesn't go down later. This is a pending value.
>> Sectors that happen to get a read error may not do so later.
>
> The OP is writing continuously to the drive. Which gives no opportunity
> for read errors to show up (for Pending to climb) and gives plenty of
> opportunities for Pending sectors to be resolved. It's an ideal
> situation in terms of making the value go down.
But the continuously writing is to different sectors. The software is
appending to existing files or creating new files. After the loop's
end, maybe the OP is copying out the old files to save as an archive or
leaving them there and the next loop creates new audio files instead of
overwriting the old ones.
The OP said "saves are made on another drive." Does that mean copy of
the existing audio files followed by deleting them? Even if so, how
long before the now unallocated sectors for the deleted old audio files
get reused for new audio files?
I haven't had a drive with pending sector remaps so I can't tell from
experience how long before the count should go down other than to say it
is supposed to go down on the next write (and success of the write) to
the suspect sector (well, cluster that contains that sector). If the
drive incorporated the offline correction to test suspect sectors and
assuming the drive went idle for long enough for the disk to be
considered offline then I would think just 6 suspect sectors would get
tested whenever the disk was considered offline (I doubt it takes long
to test them). If you're just waiting until a free cluster has the
suspect sector get rewritten by something that uses it later, how would
you know when it got tested?
If the pending sector count (of how much to remap) never goes down then
the reserve space has been consumed and those suspect sectors will never
get remapped *if* they later test as bad on write. So unless you know
some process is going to use that particular unallocated sector to write
to it and with your drive never going idle to perform the offline
correction testing, how would you know how long to wait to see if the
pending count stayed the same (meaning no more reserve space to remap if
a write finds them still bad) or if it goes down?
If it keeps incrementing up then the drive is getting worse (well,
probably getting worse until whenever they happen to get retested on a
write). You'd think there would be a utility you could use to force a
retest (write) of whatever sectors that SMART considered suspect in its
pending count but maybe there's no external means of finding out which
sectors are being tracked by the SMART history in the logic on the disk.
> On my failing drive, the Pending count has stayed at zero the whole
> time, while the reallocations grow on write. Which is a bit strange.
> I can read-verify my failing drive, and the Pending will not go up.
> But if I do fresh writes to the drive (write 500GB of video), then
> I see fresh reallocations the next time I check SMART. And the whole
> thing, has made a mockery of my understanding of how automatic
> reallocation works. For my drive to work the way it does, implies
> the read head follows behind the write head, and can observe what
> has just been written (read-after-write). And how likely is that ?
>
> Paul
That's the problem with SMART: it isn't that smart. The drive makers
are allowed far too much leeway in how they interpret the SMART values,
what they will use them for, and how they define the updated values.
Like I mentioned, the temperature value (attribute C2) in the OP's SMART
data is showing over 1 million degrees Celsius. I really doubt that.
SMART has never been completely independent of a particular drive
maker's interpretation and implementation. Some do it this way, some do
it that way, some don't update some values, others put in wrong values.
On old drives, like the OP's, SMART was in its infancy and many values
retrieved from it were unreliable. For old drives, I never rely on the
SMART values. I saw way too many health monitor utilities reading the
SMART data and declaring the drives as bad when there was nothing wrong
with them. I'd probably rely more on SpinRite and HDD<something>
(forget its name) to thoroughly test a drive to determine if a suspect
hard disk was usable or not long before I relied on SMART data.
The point of SMART was to provide predictive failure analysis. It's
failed at that intent which seems mostly due to the variable (and often
bad) implementation allowed by each disk maker and how much them
implement over time with varying models from each disk maker. With
SMART, I feel like I'm spinning a Magic 8 ball to predict if the hard
disk is good or bad (have some fun here: http://www.magic8ball.org/).
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
Paul wrote:
> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Like I mentioned, the temperature value (attribute C2) in the OP's SMART
>> data is showing over 1 million degrees Celsius. I really doubt that.
>
> Just for kicks, I figured I'd check.
>
> The "data" value is 1441850 decimal.
>
> Now, convert that to hex, and get 0x0016003A
>
> Ignore the 16 part for a moment, take the 3A part and that's 48+10=58
> which gives the 58C on the screen :-)
>
> I don't know the significance of the 0x00160000 offset. It's like
> one word too many, was read out (program read 32 bits, disk defined 16 bits?).
>
> Paul
There are other SMART values that are 48 bits long but the drive maker
only inserts 32 bits. The result is at some point the SMART value
becomes negative (since the disk only uses 32 bits so the leftmost bits
get truncated with the results of a leading 1). That's just another
reason why I feel S.M.A.R.T. is just too dumb to rely upon.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/29/2012 5:54 PM, VanguardLH a écrit :
> Setup.exe wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Got a big big problem :
>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so that
>> we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens ....
>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>
>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15 hours,
>> thats it) ..
>>
>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
>> "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And if
>> i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small files is
>> enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
>>
>> Thats awfull !!!
>>
>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors of
>> the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
>>
>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
>> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems to
>> repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy / cut
>> the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
>>
>> I'm confused.
>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
>> size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
>> writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
>>
>> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?
>> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
>> I really don't know.
>> Hope someone can help ...
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Julien
>
> From their web site:
>
> Loop Recorder has 64bit support to handle recorded audio data of up to
> 16 GB.
>
> Loop Recorder Pro can handle even larger amounts of audio data. With a
> FAT32-filesystem it can record audio data of up to 256 GB per session
> and with NTFS it is unlimited.
>
> So you must be using their Standard version and not their Pro version.
> Or have you been indefinitely using their free trial version which does
> not include support?
>
> The Pro version has the archive function, not the Standard version (and
> very probably not the trial version).
We use Pro Version.
The prog seems just unfinished : on June 30 2012 its marked on the
website "better performance under Windows 98SE and ME "
I take it as a very bad joke.
The prog has some features that are indeed totally out of date, so thats
a sign of something strange ( for a 200 euros program, its not fair).
Even when the app is crashing, the orthagraphic of the message is wrong,
they forget a letter in the word, so you really have the impression its
not serious - in the same time you understand that your recording is
just LOST.
If the progs needs very special monitoring of hard disk for not to fail
everytime, they should say it in BIG LETTERS, the biggest possible
letters. That should even be updated and implemented in the prog.
I cannot believe one second the NASA can trust such an app ...
Just figure out I used it since now almost 10 years or more, with all
possible cares and setting ...
Whats the mystery ?
>
> Changing cluster size won't affect a defect in the 'Save' algorithm in
> the program to close any files on which it has a handle. From
> http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_radio.php, it appears you don't just save
> the recording but instead you open an editor and from there you do a
> save function. http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_editor.php shows the
> editor that should open when you click "Edit and Save". Are you doing
> any editing before you click the Save button (disk icon in toolbar)?
>
> Are you clicking on the "Edit and Save" button in the Loop Recording
> dialog or are you instead bringing up the editor and saving from there
> without first stopping the looped recording? Presumably you must first
> stop recording before you start editing and then save.
>
> What "3 errors" are you talking about (in the temp folder with the 4000
> files)? What was this "analysis" you mention?
>
> Do you really need to generate 4000 files for 15 hours of recording?
> From their product description, it looks like you can create some huge-
> sized audio files the limit on size depending on which file system you
> use for the drive. http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_diskusage.php shows
> file sizes up to about 300GB which is obviously a lot larger than your
> "small files" comment. How big is your loop? Are you leaving it at the
> small default of 10 minutes? Or did you up it to hours? I don't see
> the program is restricted from going up to your 15 hour window but then
> I cannot see the parameters you can specify when you click on Change
> button for Time Settings in the Loop Recorder dialog (shown at
> http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_radio.php). You aren't hitting a maximum
> file count limit per folder in the file system but you might be hitting
> a maximum object count in the program.
>
> Since you are talking about capturing "live" content then you're talking
> about people talking on your show (you don't mention what your show airs
> so maybe "live" content is local talent coming into your studio to play
> their music). If it's just talking you want to capture, you could lower
> the bitrate to reduce the size of the audio file(s). Their diskusage
> web page show how much difference there is in size the audio files with
> different bitrates. You never mentioned how long is the actual loop
> that you are recording but having 4000 audio files sure makes it appear
> you chose a small loop size. My guess is that each loop is generating
> an audio file. So make the loops longer. If you think the audio files
> are then getting too big then reduce the bitrate for capture.
>
> Well, it's possible you're hitting a max file count per folder depending
> on what file system you are using on the drive but which you never
> mentioned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat32 has a table that shows
> the maximum number of files (per folder). If you using the old FAT12
> file system, the max is 4068 files per folder. You didn't even mention
> which operating system you are using. So what OS and what file
> system(s) within it are you using?
>
> Are you running an anti-virus program or anything else that interrogates
> the files on your computer? If so, have you tried excluding this
> program's "temp" folder?
>
> You tried all their contacts at http://www.looprecorder.de/email.php,
> even the postal address (by sending your letter with signature
> confirmation to prove they got it), and they didn't reply? Support
> should be included in the paid product. You did pay for it, right, and
> you're not just indefinitely using their trial product, right?
> Personally I get suspicious of any company proliferating commercialware
> that hides behind a private domain registration (their registrar is
> listed as the registrant instead of the real registrant) to hide their
> identity. looprecorder.de's registration shows their registrar (1and1)
> as the registrant. Registrants pay extra to hide.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/29/2012 5:54 PM, VanguardLH a écrit :
> Setup.exe wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Got a big big problem :
>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so that
>> we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens ....
>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>
>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15 hours,
>> thats it) ..
>>
>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
>> "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And if
>> i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small files is
>> enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
>>
>> Thats awfull !!!
>>
>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors of
>> the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
>>
>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
>> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems to
>> repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy / cut
>> the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
>>
>> I'm confused.
>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
>> size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
>> writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
>>
>> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?
>> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
>> I really don't know.
>> Hope someone can help ...
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Julien
>
> From their web site:
>
> Loop Recorder has 64bit support to handle recorded audio data of up to
> 16 GB.
>
> Loop Recorder Pro can handle even larger amounts of audio data. With a
> FAT32-filesystem it can record audio data of up to 256 GB per session
> and with NTFS it is unlimited.
>
> So you must be using their Standard version and not their Pro version.
> Or have you been indefinitely using their free trial version which does
> not include support?
>
> The Pro version has the archive function, not the Standard version (and
> very probably not the trial version).
>
> Changing cluster size won't affect a defect in the 'Save' algorithm in
> the program to close any files on which it has a handle. From
> http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_radio.php, it appears you don't just save
> the recording but instead you open an editor and from there you do a
> save function. http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_editor.php shows the
> editor that should open when you click "Edit and Save". Are you doing
> any editing before you click the Save button (disk icon in toolbar)?
Yes, no no, I use the most simple saving process without editing.
Its a simple button "Quick Save" : thats is just saving the recordings
(in recollecting tones of smal wave files used for that)
>
> Are you clicking on the "Edit and Save" button in the Loop Recording
> dialog or are you instead bringing up the editor and saving from there
> without first stopping the looped recording? Presumably you must first
> stop recording before you start editing and then save.
>
> What "3 errors" are you talking about (in the temp folder with the 4000
> files)? What was this "analysis" you mention?
3 of this about 4000 files have problems, so the WHOLE save crashes.
>
> Do you really need to generate 4000 files for 15 hours of recording?
Its not me : i am NOT the authour of this program.
But i think its not a bad idea they process this way, cause you have
perhaps less errors in many smal files than in a big wave file.
When saving fail, we can keep the temp et try to do something with it
(and thats painfull work)
> From their product description, it looks like you can create some huge-
> sized audio files the limit on size depending on which file system you
> use for the drive. http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_diskusage.php shows
> file sizes up to about 300GB which is obviously a lot larger than your
> "small files" comment. How big is your loop?
About 2100 Mo for 15 hours with mp3 320 compression, from the original
temp wav files (the saving process does the conversion)
Are you leaving it at the
> small default of 10 minutes? Or did you up it to hours?
I use 15 hours loop segments, sometimes 20.
I don't see
> the program is restricted from going up to your 15 hour window but then
> I cannot see the parameters you can specify when you click on Change
> button for Time Settings in the Loop Recorder dialog (shown at
> http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_radio.php). You aren't hitting a maximum
> file count limit per folder in the file system but you might be hitting
> a maximum object count in the program.
>
> Since you are talking about capturing "live" content then you're talking
> about people talking on your show (you don't mention what your show airs
> so maybe "live" content is local talent coming into your studio to play
> their music).
yes, things like that.
If it's just talking you want to capture, you could lower
> the bitrate
Oh my god, no no.
mp3 320 kbps is enough compromise !!!
to reduce the size of the audio file(s). Their diskusage
> web page show how much difference there is in size the audio files with
> different bitrates. You never mentioned how long is the actual loop
> that you are recording but having 4000 audio files sure makes it appear
> you chose a small loop size. My guess is that each loop is generating
> an audio file. So make the loops longer. If you think the audio files
> are then getting too big then reduce the bitrate for capture.
>
> Well, it's possible you're hitting a max file count per folder depending
> on what file system you are using on the drive but which you never
> mentioned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat32 has a table that shows
> the maximum number of files (per folder). If you using the old FAT12
> file system, the max is 4068 files per folder. You didn't even mention
> which operating system you are using. So what OS and what file
> system(s) within it are you using?
>
> Are you running an anti-virus program or anything else that interrogates
> the files on your computer? If so, have you tried excluding this
> program's "temp" folder?
No no .. were pretty good in perfect OS settings, both hardware /
software. No antivirus at all, nothings comes to disturb the main task.
No auto updates of anything, etc etc ... The context is on solid state.
>
> You tried all their contacts at http://www.looprecorder.de/email.php,
> even the postal address (by sending your letter with signature
> confirmation to prove they got it), and they didn't reply?
Thet replied me this day !
I send them back my .. sadness and misanderstood.
Wait and see.
Support
> should be included in the paid product. You did pay for it, right, and
> you're not just indefinitely using their trial product, right?
Erm, lets say we use a "special" trial pro version.
Thats usually the way people do to fully test progs and see if it worth
to buy it. But we also used the official Trial Pro Version, that is
crashing the same way, if you use big time loops (5 hours and more)
> Personally I get suspicious of any company proliferating commercialware
> that hides behind a private domain registration (their registrar is
> listed as the registrant instead of the real registrant)
???
to hide their
> identity.
but they give their 2 names, so ??
looprecorder.de's registration shows their registrar (1and1)
> as the registrant. Registrants pay extra to hide.
I don't really understand (because tired of thinking in english sometimes)
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/29/2012 6:18 PM, Pen a écrit :
> On 6/29/2012 6:51 AM, Setup.exe wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> Got a big big problem :
>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops,
>> infinitly, so that we can save our work if needed - if
>> something good, live, happens ....
>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>
>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files
>> (for 15 hours, thats it) ..
>>
>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes,
>> saying "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk
>> truncated".. And if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3
>> errors in the 4000 small files is enough to destroy all the
>> archive saving process ..
>>
>> Thats awfull !!!
>>
>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from
>> the authors of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach
>> them since years ...
>>
>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog,
>> and I offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors,
>> besides it seems to repair some small errors (It brings less
>> errors in trying to copy / cut the temp to rebuild a part of
>> the lost recordings)
>>
>> I'm confused.
>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger
>> cluster size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for
>> a HEAVY disk writing process ? - don't forget the prog is
>> running 24/7/365
>>
>> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?.
>> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
>> I really don't know.
>> Hope someone can help ...
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Julien
>>
> You really should be running a better checking program than
> chkdsk. I would suggest SpinRite. If there are any disk
> problems it will find them.
> http://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm
>
Thank you, i will do it either.
Perhaps all the problems came from this side, if the disk is always in
writing process with those X 000 litle files.
So, if the LOOP is "tiring", "exhausting" the hard drives, they should
ADVERTISE SERIOUSLY the users before they use it. And just loose the data.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/29/2012 7:52 PM, Paul a écrit :
> Setup.exe wrote:
>
>>
>> Woh, many thanks for this significative response. Got to read it again
>> as I m not exactly english thinking and poor in maths understanding !
>>
>> But, well, I knew already HD Tune and what is the SMART, so i did the
>> readings, here is what it looks like :
>> http://nobody4.free.fr/ZVRAC/HD_TUNE.jpg
>
> Very interesting.
>
> Some observations:
>
> 1) Your hard drive is too hot!
>
> 58C will ruin the hard drive.
>
> Fit forced air cooling near the drive.
>
> The best way to do this, is mount a fan capable of drawing cool
> room air into the computer case, and have it blow directly
> over the surface of the hard drive.
>
> High temperature operation like that, will shorten the lifetime
> of the hard drive motor. The lubricant inside the sealed motor,
> will be forced out of the motor.
>
> 2) Reallocated sectors = 1, is not a bad number.
>
> 3) Current Pending Sectors count = 6 is more interesting.
> It seems, for whatever reason, your drive may be having more problems
> reading the data back later. My failing drive doesn't do that.
> The thing is, since you're "loop recording", there should be many
> opportunities to reduce the Current Pending Sector count, and
> increase the Reallocated Sectors. But your Reallocated Sectors
> is not grown significantly.
>
> I do not know how to interpret this information, except to suggest
> the high operating temperature is partially responsible. Cool off the
> drive.
Ohh, of course. Now its EAST, and this computer is near the ceilling all
the more !!! Fu ... !
>
> 4) Power on Hours is 14819. That's roughly 617 days of continuous
> 24 hour operation. Most of my drives, don't last that long here.
>
> The customer reviews (Feedback button) for that drive, are excellent.
> When it comes time to replace that hard drive with another, it will
> not last nearly as long in your application.
>
> HGST HDS722516VLAT80 Deskstar 7K250 IDE Ultra ATA100 160GB 7200 RPM
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822145061
>
> Your drive was designed some time after the IBM fiasco. IBM sold
> their consumer disk division to Hitachi, after the incident described
> here, and then they became HGST. And presumably, they learned from
> their mistakes. I would say your 7K250 has held up well.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deskstar
>
> *******
>
> Some computer cases, have an air intake fan, near the drive
> bay area. This fan draws cool air from the room, and blows it
> over the drive bay.
I know how to do that, of course. An I will very quick.
Just don't forget I had problems with the loop rec. since years, with
different drives and not in the heart of the heat !
>
> http://media.bestofmicro.com/H/I/253..._m9_intake.jpg
>
> Mechanically, it's better if the fan is attached to the computer
> case, rather than attached to the bay. Done this way, vibrations
> from the fan, can interact with the disk drive.
Yes of course. Our next drive will be out of all vibrations.
>
> http://media.bestofmicro.com/H/D/253...ke_m9_cage.jpg
>
> I use an externally mounted, 120mm fan, to cool my drives. The
> fan is bolted to the front of the computer, using a home-made
> aluminum mounting frame. Current operating temperature of my drives
> (as reported by HDTune) is 29C and 30C, and that's because it is a
> summer's day. I am nowhere near 58C.
>
> HTH,
> Paul
Many thanks, Mister Paul.
Its good learning all this crucial "details" that are not "details"
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/30/2012 2:43 AM, VanguardLH a écrit :
> However, I typically do not pile hard disks right next to each other in
> the drive cage. I like to leave space between them. Even if the case
> fan's speed goes up, there's not enough space between adjacent drives to
> move cooling air between them. And making sure any fat/wide cables
> don't block airflow is important, too. If you can't move them out of
> the way, twist them so they are inline with the airflow, not against it.
Of course. Now i use external cooled sata drive enclosure (no raid used)
in E Sata. With 4 2 TB hdd. (not the computer with loop rec., wich another)
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Setup.exe wrote:
> Le 6/29/2012 6:18 PM, Pen a écrit :
>> On 6/29/2012 6:51 AM, Setup.exe wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> Got a big big problem :
>>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops,
>>> infinitly, so that we can save our work if needed - if
>>> something good, live, happens ....
>>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>>
>>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files
>>> (for 15 hours, thats it) ..
>>>
>>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes,
>>> saying "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk
>>> truncated".. And if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3
>>> errors in the 4000 small files is enough to destroy all the
>>> archive saving process ..
>>>
>>> Thats awfull !!!
>>>
>>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from
>>> the authors of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach
>>> them since years ...
>>>
>>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog,
>>> and I offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors,
>>> besides it seems to repair some small errors (It brings less
>>> errors in trying to copy / cut the temp to rebuild a part of
>>> the lost recordings)
>>>
>>> I'm confused.
>>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger
>>> cluster size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for
>>> a HEAVY disk writing process ? - don't forget the prog is
>>> running 24/7/365
>>>
>>> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?.
>>> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
>>> I really don't know.
>>> Hope someone can help ...
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance
>>>
>>> Julien
>>>
>> You really should be running a better checking program than
>> chkdsk. I would suggest SpinRite. If there are any disk
>> problems it will find them.
>> http://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm
>>
>
> Thank you, i will do it either.
> Perhaps all the problems came from this side, if the disk is always in
> writing process with those X 000 litle files.
>
> So, if the LOOP is "tiring", "exhausting" the hard drives, they should
> ADVERTISE SERIOUSLY the users before they use it. And just loose the data.
>
In terms of storage technology, there are devices like this.
It would also need eight sticks of RAM. This would add greatly to the expense.
Only DDR3 RAM now, is cheap. DDR2 RAM is more expensive, and that is the type
used by this box.
Such a device, you could write it as much as you want, and it would
not wear out. If such a device still has problems, then it must
be a software problem.
*******
In a hard drive, you could replace your current hard drive, with an RE4.
For example, if the computer has two disk ports, you could run two
of these in RAID 1 mirror mode. One advantage of RE4, is TLER.
Effectively, TLER and similar features limit the performance of on-drive
error handling, to allow RAID controllers to handle the error if problematic.
In a non-RAID environment, such features are unhelpful, and manufacturers
do not recommend their use.
It is best for TLER to be "Enabled" when in a RAID array to prevent the
recovery time from a disk read or write error from exceeding the RAID
controller's timeout threshold. If a drive times out, the hard disk will
need to be manually re-added to the array, requiring a re-build and
re-synchronization of the hard disk. Enabling TLER seeks to prevent this
by interrupting error correction before timeout, to report failures only
for data segments. The result is increased reliability in a RAID array.
In a stand-alone configuration TLER should be disabled. As the drive is
not redundant, reporting segments as failed will only increase manual
intervention. Without a RAID controller to drop the disk, normal (no TLER)
recovery ability is most stable.
The WDTLER utility allows for the enabling or disabling of the TLER parameter
in the hard disk's firmware settings allowing the user to determine the best
setting for his particular usage as either a stand-alone or RAID drive.
This utility is written for DOS and you will require a DOS bootable disk
with this utility on it to use it."
So that would be a suggestion for a drive to use, either a pair of drives
in RAID 1 mirror, or a single drive (with TLER adjusted as appropriate).
*******
An SSD would be a good solution, especially as the write rate of your loop
program is probably not that high. The lifetime of an SSD, is a function
of the maximum write cycles (3000) times the capacity (40GB). Say, for the
sake of argument, a recording program consumes 2GB per hour of space. Then
the SSD would last 3000*40/2 = 60000 hours or about 6.8 years. Using internal
wear leveling, the wearing of the flash is spread evenly over the address
space of the flash (so you don't "burn a hole in it").
That makes an SSD a viable solution as well.
No matter what solution you choose, keep the temperature down.
*******
Are there other ways to do it ? Yes.
This motherboard is 12" x 8" and has a G34 socket. Motherboard
costs $254 USD. The motherboard was specifically selected, to
fit in an ordinary computer case.
It has room for eight sticks of RAM. Purchase four of these kits
at $60 each, to fill the DIMM slots. This gives 32GB of reliable
storage. (Work out whether this is sufficient for a full day of
recording !) This is unbuffered ECC memory, meaning even if the
memory makes a trivial error, the error can be corrected automatically
at the hardware level.
Next, you need a G34 socket processor. This processor costs $270.
The heatsink fan and cooler are extra. I selected this as the
cheapest processor to run the recording machine.
For a total system cost of $254 + (4 * $60) + $270, you have
32GB of reliable storage. Total cost so far $764 USD.
Add to it, this Windows program for $18.99 USD. Now our system
cost is 764+19 = $783 USD. This converts the 32GB of memory
on the motherboard, into a 31.5GB hard drive (need to leave a little
RAM for the OS). The loop files would be safe in here, as long as
the computer power remains running. The files can be transferred
out of the RAMDisk at your convenience (at the end of the day).
There are many details to be worked out in such an approach, but
that was intended to give you an alternative solution - a solid
state storage which might be a bit cheaper than the Acard box.
*******
So those are some alternate ways of building storage systems.
My suspicion would be, the handling of I/O by the looprecorder
program, needs work... And even with the *best* hardware solution,
the program may cause problems.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
Paul wrote:
> In terms of storage technology, there are devices like this.
>
> http://www.acard.com.tw/english/fb01..._idno=5&ino=28
>
> Price is listed as USD 339.
>
> It would also need eight sticks of RAM. This would add greatly to the expense.
> Only DDR3 RAM now, is cheap. DDR2 RAM is more expensive, and that is the type
> used by this box.
Just be sure to replace the lithium battery at 3-year intervals, or
shorter, to ensure the RAM drive doesn't lose its contents (before the
OP gets around to saving the audio files to somewhere else).
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
Setup.exe wrote:
> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> What "3 errors" are you talking about (in the temp folder with the 4000
>> files)? What was this "analysis" you mention?
>
> 3 of this about 4000 files have problems, so the WHOLE save crashes.
So what does the program save? If it is collection thousands of small
audio files, what does the "Save" function do? Merge them all into one
audio file? If so, it seems you could either use backup or snapshot
software to make sure you have a copy of all those audio files before
you do a save. If the save fails, you can restore and try again. Or
you could use other software to do the file merge. I'm sure the
alt.comp.freeware newsgroup could come up with something that would walk
through every audio file in a folder to merge their contents into a
larger audio file. I use FormatFactory but it isn't usable with such a
large number of files. You almost need something that runs as a batch
processor: gets a list of files and then appends them one at a time into
a larger audio file. The reason I mention a batch processor is to allow
the program to skip over bad audio files. If 3 are corrupted,
unreadable, or incorrectly formatted or truncated (at the beginning)
then something that processes one file at a time could skip a bad file
and keep going onto the rest to append them.
If it's just the Save function that fails and if the Save merely merges
all the small audio files, there are other and probably newer and better
maintained merge utilities you could use. Instead of hitting Save in
LoopRecorder, you'd click a shortcut you put in a toolbar in the Windows
taskbar on on the desktop to run the audio merge batch processor
utility. The audio merge program would probably also do the conversion
between filetypes (i.e., .wav to .mp3 or whatever you want).
I'd say, if nothing else works, to replace their Save function with your
own (with an external program that does the same thing). I could
probably come up with a batch (.bat) file using a for-loop and an audio
merge program with a CLI (command-line interface) where it traversed
through a list of the files in a specified folder to merge them one at a
time to a larger audio file (and in a different audio format). If a
particular source audio couldn't be read or the merge failed then the
for-loop would skip it and move onto the next file in the list. I just
figure there's already something out there, and probably free, that
could walk through all files in a specified folder to merge them
together while skipping those that caused errors.
> I use 15 hours loop segments, sometimes 20.
So the program still generates thousands of small audio files despite
you telling it to create a "loop" of 15 hours. Boobs! They don't honor
your configuration.
> Thet replied me this day ! I send them back my .. sadness and
> misanderstood. Wait and see.
>
>> Support should be included in the paid product. You did pay for it,
>> right, and you're not just indefinitely using their trial product,
>> right?
>
> Erm, lets say we use a "special" trial pro version. Thats usually the
> way people do to fully test progs and see if it worth to buy it. But
> we also used the official Trial Pro Version, that is crashing the
> same way, if you use big time loops (5 hours and more)
So you never paid for the program and are still running the trial
version (which much be a non-expiring trial version for you to be using
it for years)? I thought you said you paid around 200 euro for this
software.
>
>> Personally I get suspicious of any company proliferating commercialware
>> that hides behind a private domain registration (their registrar is
>> listed as the registrant instead of the real registrant)
>
> ???
>
> to hide their
>> identity.
>
> but they give their 2 names, so ??
If the contact info they provide on their web site is viable then there
is no reason to hide who they are in their domain registration.
The typical excuse I hear about hiding the registrant in the WhoIs info
for a domain registration is to avoid getting spammed by other
registrars begging you to switch to their service (these typically
showing up near the expiration for the domain). Geez, like these
registrants can't use free e-mail accounts with filters that block or
discard all e-mails that don't originate from the current registrar, uh
huh, sure.
Another possibility for a registrant to be hidden is that they really
didn't register their own domain or they get a very special price with a
webhoster. The company isn't running their own web server. They aren't
using an enterprise or company-level web service. They are using a
cheap webhoster to host their web site and they get a courtesy domain
from that webhoster. The webhoster owns the courtesy domain so they get
listed as its owner. So the company isn't expressly hiding but neither
are they operating their own web server or managing one hosted elsewhere
and they didn't even register their own domain (so they own it) to be
hosted by them or elsewhere. They got a courtesy domain during their
stay at a webhoster and they'll lose that courtesy domain if and when
they leave that webhoster (unless the webhoster offers to sell it to
them when they leave).
In the Internet, little companies and home-based businesses can look
just as big as the big companies. You don't know if you're dealing with
a Fortune 500 type of business or some guy in his basement den.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
Setup.exe wrote:
> We use Pro Version.
> The prog seems just unfinished : on June 30 2012 its marked on the
> website "better performance under Windows 98SE and ME "
> I take it as a very bad joke.
I'd take it as the software doesn't support later versions of Windows.
NTFS would not have been contemplated nor would changes in the system
API. There were old games that ran okay that I had to dump when I moved
from a 9x-based Windows to an NT-based Windows. I hunted around but
never saw where they mentioned any system requirements.
When you look in the folder where the program was installed and sort by
date, what's the datestamp on the newest *program* file (that isn't a
config file that would get modified when you change config settings)?
> The prog has some features that are indeed totally out of date, so thats
> a sign of something strange ( for a 200 euros program, its not fair).
Sorry, but vertical market software is always expensive. They have less
customers across which to spread their costs to develop and test, plus
they have less competition to push down the price.
It's possible you are still using old but unsupported software. They
don't specify any terms regarding their responsibility for support on
their web site. Perhaps a EULA or contract included in the sale defines
their responsibilities. Lots of software continues to sell long after
any development on it has ceased.
> Even when the app is crashing, the orthagraphic of the message is wrong,
> they forget a letter in the word, so you really have the impression its
> not serious - in the same time you understand that your recording is
> just LOST.
QA'ed a product once that had an error something like, "Sorry, the
program has keeled over and died with all 4 legs in the air." There was
no handler for an error and this was the fall-through case. The bug got
reported to catch the error and the fall-through error message got
changed to be more professional and informative. The programmer thought
the fall-through case would never be reached. "He don't know me vewy
well, do he" (ala Bugs Bunny; http://tinyurl.com/75cz4mq for audio).
They make, I break. That's the fun part of QA.
> If the progs needs very special monitoring of hard disk for not to fail
> everytime, they should say it in BIG LETTERS, the biggest possible
> letters. That should even be updated and implemented in the prog.
Wouldn't that apply to every program that creates and modifies data
files? Corruption of data files would affect us of Microsoft Excel,
SQL, or any program relying on the integrity of its data files.
> I cannot believe one second the NASA can trust such an app ...
"One of our customers is NASA." Well, "is" might actually be "was". Or
"is" means NASA is using it on Win98. They may have sold only 1 copy to
NASA but they have no information to know that NASA is still using it.
How would they, for example, know you are still using their software?
All they have is their customer list from the info you provide when you
purchase the software. I've purchased lots of software over the decades
that I've long abandoned, and some of which didn't survive long at all
because it didn't work or meet my criteria or I found something better.
When you see lists of big customers or awards on a site, check them out.
Without corroboting evidence by those customers (at their sites, blogs,
or somewhere OTHER than the software site citing those customers), there
is no proof that those customers are still customers or to what degree
they were customers. For their claimed awards, go check the site they
claim is giving them an award. Some awards are really old. Some are at
garbage sites where the author was bribed to give an award so they could
get a free copy of the software. In fact, some award sites are ran by
the software producer to pretend they are someone else giving the award
(the software author is giving themself an award). Also, NASA still
uses some r-e-a-l-l-y old stuff.
As for their claimed "awards", some are nothing more than a blurb at a
download site. Noob reporters have to produce or they get fired. They
produce "awards" like the one referenced at http://www.pcwelt.de/downloads/Loop-...er-590339.html. That's not an
award. That's a [very short] description! Obviously a download site
has to tell you something about the download they host. Then notice the
low rating for the product by *users*. The editor's rating may be
useless (use their description to see if they even installed the product
to see it in action or just puked out the sale blurb given to them by
the software author). Some of the "award" sites don't exist anymore or
got merged somewhere else (e.g., shareware.com became part of CNet's
download site - who don't list looprecorder anymore). For all the
"awards" they list, some you can't see unless you register (but that
doesn't mean the product is still described there), some are obvious
that the so-called editor never installed the product but just describe
it by what they were told, and none of them are actual awards for
product excellence but just descriptions for downloads. Their awards
are user or editor ratings. Where there were user ratings, they were
low (2 out of 5 stars). The editor ratings were all bogus as they
typically are at download sites.
Many of such "award" sites are merely used to provide newer dated links
in searches to pretend a product is still supported, still viable, and
current. A search that shows some bogus editor puking out a sales blurb
given to them by the software author that is dated in the last year
misleads users doing searches into thinking that's when the product was
updated or makes them believe the product is current.
To me, their list of fake "awards" would have me looking elsewhere for a
solution.
http://www.softpedia.com/progChangel...log-11438.html
shows a changelop of the product (which is really when it got submitted
to Softpedia for them to provide a download or link to the product).
Since it mentions Windows 7 fixes, it does seem the product is getting
some development work done on it. I also see at the product's web site
(http://www.looprecorder.de/download.php) that they list versions of
Windows later than the Windows 98/ME that you stated above. Finally I
found their system requirements listing at:
I have to wonder if this is an old 16-bit application. Those run in an
emulation layer and typically as threads all under the same emulation
layer. If one crashes, it takes the others out. For more info, read http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/m.../ff756590.aspx. I don't know
what else you have running on your host plus you have not yet revealed
what version of Windows on which you are running LoopRecorder Pro.
Maybe following the advice to run each 16-bit app in its own address
space would prevent corruption of LoopRecorder by some other oldie
16-bit app you are also running on the same host.
(BTW: 16-bit apps won't install or run on 64-bit versions of Win7. For
that, you need something like DosBox.)
To merge all the files into one big file, load (select) the files into
the joblist and select the "encode to single file" checkbox. Then start
encoding into the one output file. From posts in their forums there,
all the input files must all be at the same sampling rate and sample
resolution (which means you cannot mix mono and stereo). So if the
input files are different audio formats (not likely since they are being
produced by the same program, LoopRecorder), you might have to do 2
passes: batch mode to convert all the files to the same format followed
by the encoding of them all into one big file. Obviously you'll need
twice the disk space since the originals still exist as you're creating
the collection file, or you could create the collection file somewhere
else, like your save/archive location.
Before trialing this product, I'd ask in their forum if the batch
operation (the "joblist") will skip over corrupted or defective source
files. You don't want to get another product that aborts collecting
4000 audio files together just because 3 of them aren't usable.
Another freebie I found was http://sox.sourceforge.net/Docs/Features.
Users claim it can merge (concatenate or append together) a list of
audio files, do mixing, and even merge 2 mono files into a stereo file.
These are also mentioned as features on their web page. I don't know
why their Features page lists lots of audio format but their FAQ say it
outputs only Apple AIFF format. Maybe it can read all the audio formats
but only write to AIFF. If it does indeed only output AIFF then you
could use another audio converter (with a fancy GUI) to convert the big
file into a different audio format. This is a command-line utility for
batch processing of audio files. Don't know if you demand a pretty GUI
for an app and don't like having to specify command-line parameters.
They show an example batch (script) file for processing multiple input
audio files and, sure enough, it uses a for-loop to walk through a list
of files. From http://sox.sourceforge.net/sox.html, you add the -m
command-line switch to concatenate audio files into one output file.
I'm assuming that you would then, in the for-loop, specify the output
file as one of the input files (i.e., you concatenate the collection
file with another source file). The for-loop would be preceeded with a
copy command to create the first version of the collection file. You
could use a company banner message to declare the content is yours, copy
that into the collection.wav file, like:
copy c:\media\ournotice.wav e:\archive\collection.wav
for %%a in (%*) do sox -m e:\archive\collection.wav %%a e:\archive\collection.wav
This will only work if the program reads all of collection.wav into a
buffer and closes that file so it can then be overwritten. There are
other tricks possible by renaming files, like using collection.wav as a
source file in the for-loop but output to newcollection.wav and then in
another command in the for-loop renaming newcollection.wav to
collection.wav. I'm not really trying to provide a usable batch script
here and am only showing that batch processing is possible. If a
particular loop in the for-loop fails because the source file isn't
usable then the sox.exe program error (aborts) but the loop proceeds to
the next iteration to append the next audio file. Unless you test the
error code returned by a program, the for-loop isn't going to stop
because one iteration produced an error.
There are other programs that can do the merge of many audio files into
one big audio file. So you don't have to rely on LoopRecorder doing
that for you since it appears to often fail. Just do the same function
outside the program.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/30/2012 7:28 PM, VanguardLH a écrit :
> Setup.exe wrote:
>
>> We use Pro Version.
>> The prog seems just unfinished : on June 30 2012 its marked on the
>> website "better performance under Windows 98SE and ME "
>> I take it as a very bad joke.
>
> I'd take it as the software doesn't support later versions of Windows.
> NTFS would not have been contemplated nor would changes in the system
> API. There were old games that ran okay that I had to dump when I moved
> from a 9x-based Windows to an NT-based Windows. I hunted around but
> never saw where they mentioned any system requirements.
>
> When you look in the folder where the program was installed and sort by
> date, what's the datestamp on the newest *program* file (that isn't a
> config file that would get modified when you change config settings)?
Well in fact its ok, from the readme.txt :
Loop Recorder Version 2.08, Jan 2011
-Compatibility with Windows 7, 64bit
-Improved user interface
-Setup: Optionally registers existing MP3 codec
>
>> The prog has some features that are indeed totally out of date, so thats
>> a sign of something strange ( for a 200 euros program, its not fair).
>
> Sorry, but vertical market software is always expensive. They have less
> customers across which to spread their costs to develop and test, plus
> they have less competition to push down the price.
i see, ok.
>
> It's possible you are still using old but unsupported software. They
> don't specify any terms regarding their responsibility for support on
> their web site. Perhaps a EULA or contract included in the sale defines
> their responsibilities. Lots of software continues to sell long after
> any development on it has ceased.
>
>> Even when the app is crashing, the orthagraphic of the message is wrong,
>> they forget a letter in the word, so you really have the impression its
>> not serious - in the same time you understand that your recording is
>> just LOST.
>
> QA'ed a product once that had an error something like, "Sorry, the
> program has keeled over and died with all 4 legs in the air."
woh, amazing ..
There was
> no handler for an error and this was the fall-through case. The bug got
> reported to catch the error and the fall-through error message got
> changed to be more professional and informative. The programmer thought
> the fall-through case would never be reached. "He don't know me vewy
> well, do he" (ala Bugs Bunny; http://tinyurl.com/75cz4mq for audio).
> They make, I break. That's the fun part of QA.
>
>> If the progs needs very special monitoring of hard disk for not to fail
>> everytime, they should say it in BIG LETTERS, the biggest possible
>> letters. That should even be updated and implemented in the prog.
>
> Wouldn't that apply to every program that creates and modifies data
> files? Corruption of data files would affect us of Microsoft Excel,
> SQL, or any program relying on the integrity of its data files.
>
>> I cannot believe one second the NASA can trust such an app ...
>
> "One of our customers is NASA." Well, "is" might actually be "was". Or
> "is" means NASA is using it on Win98. They may have sold only 1 copy to
> NASA but they have no information to know that NASA is still using it.
> How would they, for example, know you are still using their software?
> All they have is their customer list from the info you provide when you
> purchase the software. I've purchased lots of software over the decades
> that I've long abandoned, and some of which didn't survive long at all
> because it didn't work or meet my criteria or I found something better.
>
> When you see lists of big customers or awards on a site, check them out.
> Without corroboting evidence by those customers (at their sites, blogs,
> or somewhere OTHER than the software site citing those customers), there
> is no proof that those customers are still customers or to what degree
> they were customers. For their claimed awards, go check the site they
> claim is giving them an award. Some awards are really old. Some are at
> garbage sites where the author was bribed to give an award so they could
> get a free copy of the software. In fact, some award sites are ran by
> the software producer to pretend they are someone else giving the award
> (the software author is giving themself an award). Also, NASA still
> uses some r-e-a-l-l-y old stuff.
haah, ok :)
>
> As for their claimed "awards", some are nothing more than a blurb at a
> download site. Noob reporters have to produce or they get fired. They
> produce "awards" like the one referenced at
> http://www.pcwelt.de/downloads/Loop-...er-590339.html. That's not an
> award. That's a [very short] description! Obviously a download site
> has to tell you something about the download they host. Then notice the
> low rating for the product by *users*. The editor's rating may be
> useless (use their description to see if they even installed the product
> to see it in action or just puked out the sale blurb given to them by
> the software author). Some of the "award" sites don't exist anymore or
> got merged somewhere else (e.g., shareware.com became part of CNet's
> download site - who don't list looprecorder anymore). For all the
> "awards" they list, some you can't see unless you register (but that
> doesn't mean the product is still described there), some are obvious
> that the so-called editor never installed the product but just describe
> it by what they were told, and none of them are actual awards for
> product excellence but just descriptions for downloads. Their awards
> are user or editor ratings. Where there were user ratings, they were
> low (2 out of 5 stars). The editor ratings were all bogus as they
> typically are at download sites.
>
> Many of such "award" sites are merely used to provide newer dated links
> in searches to pretend a product is still supported, still viable, and
> current. A search that shows some bogus editor puking out a sales blurb
> given to them by the software author that is dated in the last year
> misleads users doing searches into thinking that's when the product was
> updated or makes them believe the product is current.
>
> To me, their list of fake "awards" would have me looking elsewhere for a
> solution.
>
> http://www.softpedia.com/progChangel...log-11438.html
> shows a changelop of the product (which is really when it got submitted
> to Softpedia for them to provide a download or link to the product).
> Since it mentions Windows 7 fixes, it does seem the product is getting
> some development work done on it. I also see at the product's web site
> (http://www.looprecorder.de/download.php) that they list versions of
> Windows later than the Windows 98/ME that you stated above. Finally I
> found their system requirements listing at:
>
> http://www.looprecorder.de/sysrequirements.php
>
> I have to wonder if this is an old 16-bit application. Those run in an
> emulation layer and typically as threads all under the same emulation
> layer. If one crashes, it takes the others out. For more info, read
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/m.../ff756590.aspx. I don't know
> what else you have running on your host plus you have not yet revealed
> what version of Windows on which you are running LoopRecorder Pro.
XP Pro SP3 32 bits + AMD Athlon 1.34 Ghz / 1.25 GB ram
The computer has just an audio streaming program (Eddcast Stand alone
version + icecast encoder) wich has its own soundcard.
No antivirus, no other "foreign" task running, taskmgr is always on to
check
But I still must check IRQ's to see if the cards no share IRQ with LAN
or Video. We already have disable all unwanted features in the bios ...
> Maybe following the advice to run each 16-bit app in its own address
> space would prevent corruption of LoopRecorder by some other oldie
> 16-bit app you are also running on the same host.
>
> (BTW: 16-bit apps won't install or run on 64-bit versions of Win7. For
> that, you need something like DosBox.)
Thank you for that great "support" ..
This 16 bits microsoft article is worth to be aware of ..
I'll see if we host 16 bits apps, and if the Lopp Rec is a 16 bits too
... Perhaps the old Soundblaster we use has an old driver that would run
on 16 bits ?
But as we're on XP, perhaps the MS article is not applicable in our case ..
Have good day
sorry that i cannot be more responsive, as its hard to read and answer
in english. But be sure I read the letters more than 3 times for each of
nice people here in the news !!
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Setup.exe wrote:
>
> Have good day
> sorry that i cannot be more responsive, as its hard to read and answer
> in english. But be sure I read the letters more than 3 times for each of
> nice people here in the news !!
>
> Julien
I tested the non-pro version of Loop Recorder.
I set the loop size to 16 hours. (44.1K, 16 bit samples, stereo,
times 16 hours times 3600 seconds per hour, gives 10GB data pool
in uncompressed .wav format.)
The tool was set to record in .wav . That eliminates the need
for an MP3 codec. Coding to MP3 could be done, using
the Quick Save file as an input to another program.
It could be, that a bug exists in the MP3 CODEC, that only
becomes apparent when processing 10GB of data.
After waiting 16 hours, the loopdir temporary directory eventually
had 10GB of tiles in it. Each file in my case was 512KB. That's
about 20,000 files.
The program does not use much in the way of resources. Its
personal RAM usage was low, as was the percentage of CPU power
required.
I used a single disk setup. C: partition held the temporary files.
I used E: partition to hold the Quick Save output.
When I click the Quick Save button, the program stops adding
new files to the temporary directory. Yet, it continues to
actually record the audio, so nothing is lost. And the RAM
usage does not grow. So where the information is stored, is
a mystery as far as Task Manager is concerned.
The program is *very slow* at doing the Quick Save. The file operation
size is 64KB roughly. That means, to transfer and concatenate
the 20,000 files, takes roughly 160,000 head movements. If I had
used two separate physical disks, then all of the reads would have
been on one disk, and all of the writes would have been on
the other disk. Doing all of that on the one disk drive,
is a bit of stress for the head assembly.
It took many minutes to complete the Quick Save. The Performance monitor
showed maybe 10MB/sec transfer rate, or about 16 minutes to copy
all the data. And no new recorded audio was lost during that interval.
I didn't see any truncated 512KB files. Nor did the Quick Save stop
or fail along the way. It all seemed to work.
I'd agree with your suggestion, of using an SSD. That may be the
best approach, and result in a speedup in the Quick Save. I have
no way of knowing though, whether that completely eliminates
the possibility of truncated or error filled files. The nice thing
about an SSD, is some of them can do 20,000 operations per second,
so the 160,000 operations needed, wouldn't take quite as long
with the SSD drive. It just needs to be big enough to
hold the loop directory (10GB size filled with 512KB files)
plus the 10GB output wave file from the Quick Save. Add in at
least another 20GB for the OS installation, and a 40GB SSD might
just be able to handle it, if you're using an older Windows OS.
Vista or Windows 7 or Windows 8 have a pretty large C: drive,
so you'd need a bigger SSD with those.
If you use that approach, I'd recommend reinstalling the OS,
installing an "AHCI" driver, and using a SSD with "TRIM" command
support. As that may do a better job of maintaining the pool
of unused space on the SSD.
One of these would do the job, without wearing out, but it's more
expensive than an SSD would be.
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/30/2012 5:24 PM, Paul a écrit :
> Setup.exe wrote:
>> Le 6/29/2012 6:18 PM, Pen a écrit :
>>> On 6/29/2012 6:51 AM, Setup.exe wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Got a big big problem :
>>>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>>>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops,
>>>> infinitly, so that we can save our work if needed - if
>>>> something good, live, happens ....
>>>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>>>
>>>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>>>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files
>>>> (for 15 hours, thats it) ..
>>>>
>>>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes,
>>>> saying "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk
>>>> truncated".. And if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3
>>>> errors in the 4000 small files is enough to destroy all the
>>>> archive saving process ..
>>>>
>>>> Thats awfull !!!
>>>>
>>>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from
>>>> the authors of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach
>>>> them since years ...
>>>>
>>>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog,
>>>> and I offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors,
>>>> besides it seems to repair some small errors (It brings less
>>>> errors in trying to copy / cut the temp to rebuild a part of
>>>> the lost recordings)
>>>>
>>>> I'm confused.
>>>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger
>>>> cluster size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for
>>>> a HEAVY disk writing process ? - don't forget the prog is
>>>> running 24/7/365
>>>>
>>>> What other "drive solution" should i adopt ?.
>>>> Take a sata drive ? A special drive ? An SSD ?
>>>> I really don't know.
>>>> Hope someone can help ...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>
>>>> Julien
>>>>
>>> You really should be running a better checking program than
>>> chkdsk. I would suggest SpinRite. If there are any disk
>>> problems it will find them.
>>> http://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm
>>>
>>
>> Thank you, i will do it either.
>> Perhaps all the problems came from this side, if the disk is always in
>> writing process with those X 000 litle files.
>>
>> So, if the LOOP is "tiring", "exhausting" the hard drives, they should
>> ADVERTISE SERIOUSLY the users before they use it. And just loose the
>> data.
>>
>
> In terms of storage technology, there are devices like this.
>
> http://www.acard.com.tw/english/fb01..._idno=5&ino=28
>
>
> Price is listed as USD 339.
>
> It would also need eight sticks of RAM. This would add greatly to the
> expense.
> Only DDR3 RAM now, is cheap. DDR2 RAM is more expensive, and that is the
> type
> used by this box.
>
> http://dl.acard.com/download/compiti...ble%20list.pdf
>
>
> Such a device, you could write it as much as you want, and it would
> not wear out. If such a device still has problems, then it must
> be a software problem.
>
> *******
>
> In a hard drive, you could replace your current hard drive, with an RE4.
> For example, if the computer has two disk ports, you could run two
> of these in RAID 1 mirror mode. One advantage of RE4, is TLER.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136697
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TLER
>
> "Desktop Computers and TLER Effect
>
> Effectively, TLER and similar features limit the performance of on-drive
> error handling, to allow RAID controllers to handle the error if
> problematic.
> In a non-RAID environment, such features are unhelpful, and manufacturers
> do not recommend their use.
>
> It is best for TLER to be "Enabled" when in a RAID array to prevent the
> recovery time from a disk read or write error from exceeding the RAID
> controller's timeout threshold. If a drive times out, the hard disk will
> need to be manually re-added to the array, requiring a re-build and
> re-synchronization of the hard disk. Enabling TLER seeks to prevent this
> by interrupting error correction before timeout, to report failures only
> for data segments. The result is increased reliability in a RAID array.
>
> In a stand-alone configuration TLER should be disabled. As the drive is
> not redundant, reporting segments as failed will only increase manual
> intervention. Without a RAID controller to drop the disk, normal (no TLER)
> recovery ability is most stable.
>
> The WDTLER utility allows for the enabling or disabling of the TLER
> parameter
> in the hard disk's firmware settings allowing the user to determine the
> best
> setting for his particular usage as either a stand-alone or RAID drive.
> This utility is written for DOS and you will require a DOS bootable disk
> with this utility on it to use it."
>
> So that would be a suggestion for a drive to use, either a pair of drives
> in RAID 1 mirror, or a single drive (with TLER adjusted as appropriate).
>
> *******
>
> An SSD would be a good solution, especially as the write rate of your loop
> program is probably not that high. The lifetime of an SSD, is a function
> of the maximum write cycles (3000) times the capacity (40GB). Say, for the
> sake of argument, a recording program consumes 2GB per hour of space. Then
> the SSD would last 3000*40/2 = 60000 hours or about 6.8 years. Using
> internal
> wear leveling, the wearing of the flash is spread evenly over the address
> space of the flash (so you don't "burn a hole in it").
>
> That makes an SSD a viable solution as well.
>
> No matter what solution you choose, keep the temperature down.
>
> *******
>
> Are there other ways to do it ? Yes.
>
> This motherboard is 12" x 8" and has a G34 socket. Motherboard
> costs $254 USD. The motherboard was specifically selected, to
> fit in an ordinary computer case.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813182230
>
> It has room for eight sticks of RAM. Purchase four of these kits
> at $60 each, to fill the DIMM slots. This gives 32GB of reliable
> storage. (Work out whether this is sufficient for a full day of
> recording !) This is unbuffered ECC memory, meaning even if the
> memory makes a trivial error, the error can be corrected automatically
> at the hardware level.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820139262
>
> Next, you need a G34 socket processor. This processor costs $270.
> The heatsink fan and cooler are extra. I selected this as the
> cheapest processor to run the recording machine.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819105266
>
> For a total system cost of $254 + (4 * $60) + $270, you have
> 32GB of reliable storage. Total cost so far $764 USD.
>
> Add to it, this Windows program for $18.99 USD. Now our system
> cost is 764+19 = $783 USD. This converts the 32GB of memory
> on the motherboard, into a 31.5GB hard drive (need to leave a little
> RAM for the OS). The loop files would be safe in here, as long as
> the computer power remains running. The files can be transferred
> out of the RAMDisk at your convenience (at the end of the day).
>
> http://memory.dataram.com/products-a...ftware/ramdisk
>
> There are many details to be worked out in such an approach, but
> that was intended to give you an alternative solution - a solid
> state storage which might be a bit cheaper than the Acard box.
>
> *******
>
> So those are some alternate ways of building storage systems.
>
> My suspicion would be, the handling of I/O by the looprecorder
> program, needs work... And even with the *best* hardware solution,
> the program may cause problems.
>
> Paul
Thank you very much for such care and rich ideas / new ways !
That is very good but I fear we don't have such money.
(but its interresting, i checked all the links)
All the more, the prog is told to run on normal desktop computers.
(I know if that was i would not be here :))
I read in the help of the prog :
Performance
Loop Recorder uses special multimedia functions for disk reading and
writing, that don't use caching. So your disk cache will be kept clean
and ready for the files you access often. Please enable this in the
Config box.
On a P450, the minimized Loop Recorder runs with only 0.6% CPU usage.
You will not even recognize, that Loop Recorder is running. We recommend
to add it to the Startup folder of the Start Menu, so you will never
miss the beginning of something that you would have liked to record. "
And is true. Its takes much proc. when saving (i don't talk of editing)
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : saving fail offently !
"Setup.exe" <nobody4@free.fr> wrote in message
news:4fedc942$0$16504$426a74cc@news.free.fr...
> Le 6/29/2012 4:02 PM, Brian Cryer a écrit :
>> "Setup.exe" <nobody4@free.fr> wrote in message
>> news:4fed88be$0$6823$426a74cc@news.free.fr...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Got a big big problem :
>>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so
>>> that we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens
>>> ....
>>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>>
>>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15
>>> hours, thats it) ..
>>>
>>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
>>> "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And
>>> if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small
>>> files is enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
>>>
>>> Thats awfull !!!
>>>
>>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors
>>> of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
>>
>> You could try asking for your money back, that might get a response.
>>
>> I would try sending a polite email to every email address you can find
>> on their website, asking for assistance.
>
> I did that already, they are deaf.
> Even worst, obviously their prog is totally out of date, perhaps its the
> reason its fails. There is no recent upgrade. Some windows in the prog
> just refer to Win98 system files, and of course that works not.
>
> Besides, its a mess cause the app could be (or is) excellent, and i have
> never seen such an equivalent
>
>>
>>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
>>> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems
>>> to repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy /
>>> cut the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
>>
>> Whilst chkdsk is good, you can often get an idea of whether there might
>> be disk related errors by looking in the System event log - run up event
>> viewer and them skim through the System event log. Ignore information
>> and warning messages, and (for now) any errors that aren't disk related.
>> I suspect there won't be but if there are any disk related errors
>> recorded then that would indicate a hardware related issue somewhere.
>>
>> The next time you get an error, go straight to the system event log and
>> have a look to see if anything has been reported there.
>
> Oh yes : tons of RED disk error : " Device bla bla has a bad bloc" (Event
> 7) Ok, but when running CHKDSK, it says all is ok : no bad sector. Would
> the term bad bloc" be different from "bad sector" and not advised by the
> check disk log result ???
Replace the disk.
Chkdsk might be saying the disk is okay, but the disk errors are very
significant. There is an error with the disk (or possibly with the cabling
or the controller on the board). I would replace the disk asap.
>>> I'm confused.
>>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
>>> size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
>>> writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
>>
>> Whilst I haven't use this software or experienced these specific errors,
>> I have encounted odd errors before now with a variety of applications
>> which generate files and which are long running. This might be a
>> red-herring,
>
> red-herring : what that means ?
Red-herring means it might lead you off in totally the wrong direction and
be a complete waste of time. From what you've said my suggestion about
fragmentation was a red-herring.
--
Brian Cryer http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 7/2/2012 11:03 AM, Brian Cryer a écrit :
> "Setup.exe" <nobody4@free.fr> wrote in message
> news:4fedc942$0$16504$426a74cc@news.free.fr...
>> Le 6/29/2012 4:02 PM, Brian Cryer a écrit :
>>> "Setup.exe" <nobody4@free.fr> wrote in message
>>> news:4fed88be$0$6823$426a74cc@news.free.fr...
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Got a big big problem :
>>>> I'm working on FM radio Station.
>>>> We use a small german prog to record 15 hours loops, infinitly, so
>>>> that we can save our work if needed - if something good, live, happens
>>>> ....
>>>> Here is the prog : http://www.looprecorder.de/
>>>>
>>>> This app uses a special method of disk writing :
>>>> is creates a TEMP folder with 8 x 500 of small wav files (for 15
>>>> hours, thats it) ..
>>>>
>>>> The problem is when we save, sometimes the app crashes, saying
>>>> "temporary file too short" or sometimes "data chunk truncated".. And
>>>> if i analyse the temp, I see that just 3 errors in the 4000 small
>>>> files is enough to destroy all the archive saving process ..
>>>>
>>>> Thats awfull !!!
>>>>
>>>> All the more, its just impossible to have any answer from the authors
>>>> of the app : they NEVER write, i try to reach them since years ...
>>>
>>> You could try asking for your money back, that might get a response.
>>>
>>> I would try sending a polite email to every email address you can find
>>> on their website, asking for assistance.
>>
>> I did that already, they are deaf.
>> Even worst, obviously their prog is totally out of date, perhaps its
>> the reason its fails. There is no recent upgrade. Some windows in the
>> prog just refer to Win98 system files, and of course that works not.
>>
>> Besides, its a mess cause the app could be (or is) excellent, and i
>> have never seen such an equivalent
>>
>>>
>>>> I use a 150 GB IDE drive dedicated for the temp of the prog, and I
>>>> offently do a chkdsk /f on it : its shows no errors, besides it seems
>>>> to repair some small errors (It brings less errors in trying to copy /
>>>> cut the temp to rebuild a part of the lost recordings)
>>>
>>> Whilst chkdsk is good, you can often get an idea of whether there might
>>> be disk related errors by looking in the System event log - run up event
>>> viewer and them skim through the System event log. Ignore information
>>> and warning messages, and (for now) any errors that aren't disk related.
>>> I suspect there won't be but if there are any disk related errors
>>> recorded then that would indicate a hardware related issue somewhere.
>>>
>>> The next time you get an error, go straight to the system event log and
>>> have a look to see if anything has been reported there.
>>
>> Oh yes : tons of RED disk error : " Device bla bla has a bad bloc"
>> (Event 7) Ok, but when running CHKDSK, it says all is ok : no bad
>> sector. Would the term bad bloc" be different from "bad sector" and
>> not advised by the check disk log result ???
>
> Replace the disk.
Yes, thats ok.
But as already said : i had failures since almost 10 years with the Loop
using many different disks and computers.
But if i always do the same mistakes, the prog is not guilty !!
ie : take old drives for the temp / not check the temperature / cooling
/ not check the health ...
In the other hand, I would think the loop needs full brand new drives in
order to work properly ..
>
> Chkdsk might be saying the disk is okay, but the disk errors are very
> significant. There is an error with the disk (or possibly with the
> cabling or the controller on the board). I would replace the disk asap.
>
>>>> I'm confused.
>>>> So, i just had the idea of re-format the drive with a larger cluster
>>>> size, and thats my question : is it a good thing for a HEAVY disk
>>>> writing process ? - don't forget the prog is running 24/7/365
>>>
>>> Whilst I haven't use this software or experienced these specific errors,
>>> I have encounted odd errors before now with a variety of applications
>>> which generate files and which are long running. This might be a
>>> red-herring,
>>
>> red-herring : what that means ?
>
> Red-herring means it might lead you off in totally the wrong direction
> and be a complete waste of time. From what you've said my suggestion
> about fragmentation was a red-herring.
Ah yes, ok.
The author of the prog just answered me yesterday about one of the error
message when failing and said :
"The "temporary file too short" error occurs when the sound card driver
delivers an incorrect amount of data. Please try and update the driver. "
Does this prog also generates Red-herrings ??
I mean i can't believe its now a soundcard problem, as I used so many
diffirent sound cards, some brand news with new drivers, some gold old
ones, all full duplex ... So .. I don't know ...
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 7/2/2012 12:13 AM, Paul a écrit :
> Setup.exe wrote:
>
>>
>> Have good day
>> sorry that i cannot be more responsive, as its hard to read and answer
>> in english. But be sure I read the letters more than 3 times for each
>> of nice people here in the news !!
>>
>> Julien
>
> I tested the non-pro version of Loop Recorder.
>
> I set the loop size to 16 hours. (44.1K, 16 bit samples, stereo,
> times 16 hours times 3600 seconds per hour, gives 10GB data pool
> in uncompressed .wav format.)
>
> The tool was set to record in .wav . That eliminates the need
> for an MP3 codec. Coding to MP3 could be done, using
> the Quick Save file as an input to another program.
there is no other way to do. I mean the prog tapes all data in wav, it
does not encode the signal in real time. All temp files are wav files,
the encoding beggins just when you save.
Otherwise you won't be be able to edit if you would like : editing is
always from wav source files - at least for almost all sound editors.
>
> It could be, that a bug exists in the MP3 CODEC, that only
> becomes apparent when processing 10GB of data.
Yes, its another possible idea : a fail from the codec itself !!!
>
> After waiting 16 hours, the loopdir temporary directory eventually
> had 10GB of tiles in it. Each file in my case was 512KB. That's
> about 20,000 files.
>
> The program does not use much in the way of resources. Its
> personal RAM usage was low, as was the percentage of CPU power
> required.
from the Help file :
Performance
Loop Recorder uses special multimedia functions for disk reading and
writing, that don't use caching. So your disk cache will be kept clean
and ready for the files you access often. Please enable this in the
Config... box.
On a P450, the minimized Loop Recorder runs with only 0.6% CPU usage.
You will not even recognize, that Loop Recorder is running. We recommend
to add it to the Startup folder of the Start Menu, so you will never
miss the beginning of something that you would have liked to record. "
>
> I used a single disk setup. C: partition held the temporary files.
> I used E: partition to hold the Quick Save output.
>
> When I click the Quick Save button, the program stops adding
> new files to the temporary directory. Yet, it continues to
> actually record the audio, so nothing is lost. And the RAM
> usage does not grow. So where the information is stored, is
> a mystery as far as Task Manager is concerned.
No no, in fact the prog continues to record (if setup like that in
Config) in adding new temp files to the temp. As a 15 hours saving is
pretty long (about 20 minutes lets say) it could not store the about 250
or 300 GB of wav data just in RAM or disk cache
>
> The program is *very slow* at doing the Quick Save. The file operation
> size is 64KB roughly. That means, to transfer and concatenate
> the 20,000 files, takes roughly 160,000 head movements. If I had
> used two separate physical disks, then all of the reads would have
> been on one disk, and all of the writes would have been on
> the other disk. Doing all of that on the one disk drive,
> is a bit of stress for the head assembly.
Yes, totally agree. I always used seperates drives for this prog .
>
> It took many minutes to complete the Quick Save. The Performance monitor
> showed maybe 10MB/sec transfer rate, or about 16 minutes to copy
> all the data. And no new recorded audio was lost during that interval.
>
> I didn't see any truncated 512KB files. Nor did the Quick Save stop
> or fail along the way. It all seemed to work.
Yes, if there was ONE single error, the WHOLE save would have crashed
with one of the first mentionned error messages.
>
> I'd agree with your suggestion, of using an SSD. That may be the
> best approach, and result in a speedup in the Quick Save. I have
> no way of knowing though, whether that completely eliminates
> the possibility of truncated or error filled files. The nice thing
> about an SSD, is some of them can do 20,000 operations per second,
> so the 160,000 operations needed, wouldn't take quite as long
> with the SSD drive. It just needs to be big enough to
> hold the loop directory (10GB size filled with 512KB files)
> plus the 10GB output wave file from the Quick Save. Add in at
> least another 20GB for the OS installation, and a 40GB SSD might
> just be able to handle it, if you're using an older Windows OS.
> Vista or Windows 7 or Windows 8 have a pretty large C: drive,
> so you'd need a bigger SSD with those.
No problem : the ssd can be used just for the loop, its TEMP + the
saving result, that we can move after its done.
>
> If you use that approach, I'd recommend reinstalling the OS,
> installing an "AHCI" driver, and using a SSD with "TRIM" command
> support. As that may do a better job of maintaining the pool
> of unused space on the SSD.
>
> One of these would do the job, without wearing out, but it's more
> expensive than an SSD would be.
>
> http://www.acard.com.tw/english/fb01...idno=9&ino=123
Yes, I saw this interrsting ways of ssd's !
Thanks also for this tip !
Re: error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently !
Le 6/30/2012 7:19 PM, VanguardLH a écrit :
> Setup.exe wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>>> What "3 errors" are you talking about (in the temp folder with the 4000
>>> files)? What was this "analysis" you mention?
>>
>> 3 of this about 4000 files have problems, so the WHOLE save crashes.
>
> So what does the program save? If it is collection thousands of small
> audio files, what does the "Save" function do? Merge them all into one
> audio file?
yes, but also convert them into mp3.
If so, it seems you could either use backup or snapshot
> software to make sure you have a copy of all those audio files before
> you do a save. If the save fails, you can restore and try again. Or
> you could use other software to do the file merge. I'm sure the
> alt.comp.freeware newsgroup could come up with something that would walk
> through every audio file in a folder to merge their contents into a
> larger audio file. I use FormatFactory but it isn't usable with such a
> large number of files. You almost need something that runs as a batch
> processor: gets a list of files and then appends them one at a time into
> a larger audio file. The reason I mention a batch processor is to allow
> the program to skip over bad audio files. If 3 are corrupted,
> unreadable, or incorrectly formatted or truncated (at the beginning)
> then something that processes one file at a time could skip a bad file
> and keep going onto the rest to append them.
I already use Concat (small freeware) to repair failed saves from the
temp, but its a pain to do. Concat works with 2 GB max of files, so you
have to find many tricks to makes things possible.
>
> If it's just the Save function that fails and if the Save merely merges
> all the small audio files, there are other and probably newer and better
> maintained merge utilities you could use. Instead of hitting Save in
> LoopRecorder, you'd click a shortcut you put in a toolbar in the Windows
> taskbar on on the desktop to run the audio merge batch processor
> utility. The audio merge program would probably also do the conversion
> between filetypes (i.e., .wav to .mp3 or whatever you want).
Yes, but we crually miss time and knowledge to manage those computing
things.
>
> I'd say, if nothing else works, to replace their Save function with your
> own (with an external program that does the same thing). I could
> probably come up with a batch (.bat) file using a for-loop and an audio
> merge program with a CLI (command-line interface) where it traversed
> through a list of the files in a specified folder to merge them one at a
> time to a larger audio file (and in a different audio format). If a
> particular source audio couldn't be read or the merge failed then the
> for-loop would skip it and move onto the next file in the list. I just
> figure there's already something out there, and probably free, that
> could walk through all files in a specified folder to merge them
> together while skipping those that caused errors.
>
>> I use 15 hours loop segments, sometimes 20.
>
> So the program still generates thousands of small audio files despite
> you telling it to create a "loop" of 15 hours. Boobs! They don't honor
> your configuration.
No no, the progs just works like that : the saving is just here to
rebuilt the i.e 15 houres loop - and do the file conversion in the same
time. No matter the prog does, if only it would work.
And if the Loop rec would not work with many little files, when you have
some errors in a 6 or 7 GB wav file, you could never save it after, it
would be totally messed up.
>
>> Thet replied me this day ! I send them back my .. sadness and
>> misanderstood. Wait and see.
>>
>>> Support should be included in the paid product. You did pay for it,
>>> right, and you're not just indefinitely using their trial product,
>>> right?
>>
>> Erm, lets say we use a "special" trial pro version. Thats usually the
>> way people do to fully test progs and see if it worth to buy it. But
>> we also used the official Trial Pro Version, that is crashing the
>> same way, if you use big time loops (5 hours and more)
>
> So you never paid for the program and are still running the trial
> version (which much be a non-expiring trial version for you to be using
> it for years)? I thought you said you paid around 200 euro for this
> software.
No : I want to register for some reasons, one of those is to get support
because the prog is too strange to work without special support. The
trial expires, but you can always install other copies on other PC's. I
almost build one PC for each of my project, so ...
>
>>
>>> Personally I get suspicious of any company proliferating commercialware
>>> that hides behind a private domain registration (their registrar is
>>> listed as the registrant instead of the real registrant)
>>
>> ???
>>
>> to hide their
>>> identity.
>>
>> but they give their 2 names, so ??
>
> If the contact info they provide on their web site is viable then there
> is no reason to hide who they are in their domain registration.
>
> The typical excuse I hear about hiding the registrant in the WhoIs info
> for a domain registration is to avoid getting spammed by other
> registrars begging you to switch to their service (these typically
> showing up near the expiration for the domain). Geez, like these
> registrants can't use free e-mail accounts with filters that block or
> discard all e-mails that don't originate from the current registrar, uh
> huh, sure.
>
> Another possibility for a registrant to be hidden is that they really
> didn't register their own domain or they get a very special price with a
> webhoster. The company isn't running their own web server. They aren't
> using an enterprise or company-level web service. They are using a
> cheap webhoster to host their web site and they get a courtesy domain
> from that webhoster. The webhoster owns the courtesy domain so they get
> listed as its owner. So the company isn't expressly hiding but neither
> are they operating their own web server or managing one hosted elsewhere
> and they didn't even register their own domain (so they own it) to be
> hosted by them or elsewhere. They got a courtesy domain during their
> stay at a webhoster and they'll lose that courtesy domain if and when
> they leave that webhoster (unless the webhoster offers to sell it to
> them when they leave).
>
> In the Internet, little companies and home-based businesses can look
> just as big as the big companies. You don't know if you're dealing with
> a Fortune 500 type of business or some guy in his basement den.
error of cyclic redundancy on BIG sound recording program : savingfail offently ! 
Linear Mode
