Switch to full style
Tools for hard drive diagnostics, repair, and data recovery
Post a reply

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

April 2nd, 2019, 8:24

maximus wrote:Can the USB Stabilizer do this with some setting? That could be a big winner if it worked. I just did a basic test using the two USB only drives that I have (which are both WD), and it would seem that it would work on both.

The block size was determined by the imaging program used. I don't believe there's a setting in the Stabilizer program to change that. It is displayed on the sector map screen and is constant throughout the imaging task, 128 sectors for all but the DMDE task. I can change it for successive DFL passes when I do multi-pass imaging with the DFL, going from 2048 to 128 on passes 1 and 3. The Stabilizer could be using a different (varying) block size and reporting what size the imaging program is using, I suppose.

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

April 2nd, 2019, 17:15

Just a quick response to this for now. Even if the program (in this reference DFL) requests to read 2048 sectors, when going through the Windows API, it is only really requesting to read 1,048,576 bytes (2048 * 512). I can tell you that in Linux, there is a normal limit of 256 sectors, meaning if you request more than that, it will split the reads up, so a request of 2048 sectors would be split into 4 read commands (or more if the read request does not fall on a 512 byte boundary). Actual numbers for Windows could be seen by sniffing the USB communication. So the only way to increase the actual read size would be a form of read-ahead performed by the USB Stabilizer.

I am still not sure where I am at with attempting any sort of implementation, but the idea of possibly being able to improve slow responding cases in a drastic way has peaked my interest a bit more.

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

April 2nd, 2019, 20:48

To add to how the USB Stabilizer could incorporate a read-ahead feature to assist with slow responding drives, it would first need to have a somewhat decent RAM buffer, 32MB would be the max it should need. Then you have an option to enable a progressive read-ahead. The first read would only read what was asked for, and any sequential reads following would induce a read-ahead multiplier up to an adjustable limit. If a read was not sequential, then the read-ahead multiplier is reset. The Linux OS itself actually does this, and I would think Windows does also. The USB Stabilizer could take it to the next level. It would work best with cloning, since reads would be sequential. It can also work with file level access, but allowing too high of a limit can cause the opposite effect of a slowdown.

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

April 2nd, 2019, 22:28

With the one WD drive I do have that has a slow issue, and using the Sabrent USB adapter, with the max cluster size of 240 for the passthrough, a five minute test calculated that it would take a little over 31 days to clone. I did a five minute test on the same drive with direct USB and the max 65535 cluster size, which actually hit some sort of issue before the 5 minute mark (maybe bad sectors), and it still made it far enough to be 99.5 times faster, putting it at under 8 hours to clone. I cannot be sure if all drives would work like that, but that is one hell of a result.

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

April 3rd, 2019, 0:01

maximus wrote:I did a five minute test on the same drive with direct USB and the max 65535 cluster size, which actually hit some sort of issue before the 5 minute mark (maybe bad sectors), and it still made it far enough to be 99.5 times faster, putting it at under 8 hours to clone. I cannot be sure if all drives would work like that, but that is one hell of a result.

Agree. Very nice!

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

July 6th, 2019, 23:31

pcimage wrote:Not really, I’ve just ordered one. Will report on its performance in a while.

I’ve got some nasty PCI-E SSD’s to test it on. They all have been recovered but were a right royal PITA. If this increases the quality and speed of recovery then it’s worth it to me :-)

So have you had good results with the USB Stabilizer on these?

I have been (very) slowly working on my direct USB code for HDDSuperClone, and finally have some working alpha code. When I finally get to the beta level, I may be interested in having someone test it. And I may not mind a bit of head-to-head competition with the stabilizer :D

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

July 15th, 2019, 7:47

Thank you for the information very useful.

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

August 4th, 2019, 21:58

maximus wrote:
pcimage wrote:Not really, I’ve just ordered one. Will report on its performance in a while.

I’ve got some nasty PCI-E SSD’s to test it on. They all have been recovered but were a right royal PITA. If this increases the quality and speed of recovery then it’s worth it to me :-)

So have you had good results with the USB Stabilizer on these?

I have been (very) slowly working on my direct USB code for HDDSuperClone, and finally have some working alpha code. When I finally get to the beta level, I may be interested in having someone test it. And I may not mind a bit of head-to-head competition with the stabilizer :D

So is there any interest in testing my USB Direct mode of HDDSuperClone? It is now in beta, ready for testing in the real world.

Re: New DeepSpar USB Stabilizer

August 19th, 2019, 21:01

The Direct USB mode is now available in the pro version of hddsuperclone. Is anyone interested in testing it? Or did DeepSpar find a way to quiet down anyone who bought the stabilizer :shock:
Post a reply