NTFS Volume always dirty - *FIXED*

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
I've got a computer running XP SP2 (Home). The computer itself is sound - it'll run memtest86 and Prime95 for hours and the hard drive (A sata Seagate Baracuda IV) passes Seagate's through (full scan) test, as well as the deep (chkdsk /r) windows scan without problems. The issue at hand is that the drive (partition?) is perminantly marked as dirty. Every time the computer boots, it'll run chkdsk, pass and then still set the drive as dirty. I've also tried ghosting the drive over to a spare IDE hard drive, but the results are the same. Any suggestions?

--Will
 

porcorosso

Member
Feb 22, 2006
123
0
0
There may be a setting in the registry that's causing this to happen. I'm sorry that I can't remember just what it is.

I have seen the chkntfs command correct this behavior on some systems.

If you open a CMD window and type

chkntfs volume /D

and hit the return key the default behavior should be restored to autochk (the executable that actually performs the check at boot time). BTW, you substitute the drive letter followed by a colon for "volume" in that command.

You can also use the /X switch. to forbid checking of the drive. However, I'm not sure I'd want to do that. It means that the drive won't be checked even if it really is dirty.

chkntfs /? will get you a listing of the syntax for the command.

 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
Sadly, I've tried this. Autocheck is acting properly, as the drive is really always marked as dirty. Thanks for the idea though.

--Will
 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
This is new: Every once in a while (~1 in 8 perhaps) during the chkdsk on bootup I get "An Unspecified Error has Occured" during Step 2. The system then continues to boot normally.

--Will
 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,938
5
0
Have you tried this drive in a different computer? Or try low-level formatting it?
 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
I have checked the drive on another computer, with no problems. I'm trying to avoid a reformat-reinstall and the drive itself is not symptematic - the problem transends drives even. I ghost'ed the origional drive to a spare and have run off the spare and had identical issues. The origional drive is SATA, the spare is IDE, so it doesn't seem to be a controller or cable problem either.

--Will
 

porcorosso

Member
Feb 22, 2006
123
0
0
Aw shucks!

But the extensive diagnostic work you've don't proves one thing, the problem is with the configuration of Windows. Something evil lurks in that registry. I wish I could help. I would swear that I've seen this issue, and its solution, before. But I'm danged if the answer can be found within my ancient cranium.
 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
I've seen refrences to something similar happening under Windows2000 (a problem that SP4 corrected), but little info on this under XP. For the record, I've also done a repair install and run the System File Checker (sfc.exe) a few times.

--Will
 

porcorosso

Member
Feb 22, 2006
123
0
0
I just found something while searching through my archives. When you used "chkdsk c: /d" you did reboot and let chkdsk run all the way through, right? I wonder if it would help if, after doing that, you were to go into the Tools tab on the System Properties dialog and run the file system error-checking routine there to clean up the file system. (I'd check both options.) An error in the file system would be carried over in a Ghost image, too, perhaps. I'm wondering if that, instead of a registry setting, could be the problem.
 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
Is it possible to run something akin to chkdsk on an NTFS ghost image? Or to convert an NTFS ghost image to FAT32? (Ghost 2003 btw).

--Will
 

porcorosso

Member
Feb 22, 2006
123
0
0
The only thing I know about Ghost is that I don't understand it, and that I fear what I don't understand.

;)

Speaking of the supernatural, have you considered using an exorcist?

Hey, after what you've been though, I'm only half-joking! You've been far more patient than I would have been. I'd have nuked that sucker from orbit by now.

I'll keep digging when I get a bit more time later today, but this has me baffled. Particularly the part where I just can't find the information that I thought had seen about a special registry entry. Surely someone would have piped up by now, though, if it were that easy.
 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
I've considered it ;-). Anyhow, I beleive the registry entry you are thinking of is the one that contains the "autochk autochk *" entry. It is reset by the chkntfs /D command and only configures what drives Windows checks on startup, dirty or not. I'm trying a new tact now, getting the drive marked as clean on a different computer, then defragging it (on the other computer). Perhaps that'll make some kind of difference.....

--Will
 

porcorosso

Member
Feb 22, 2006
123
0
0
Actually, it's sticking in my alleged mind that it was a DIFFERENT setting than the autocheck setting. But, as I may have hinted before, the old brain is rather rusty these days. And I'm taking medications in my old age that further cloud the picture.

Being dense isn't too bad, though. Particularly when you're watching what's on TV these days.

I'll be hoping you see a good outcome.
 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
(With drive in other computer)
1) chkdsk
2) fsutil dirty query (drive is clean)
3) defrag
4) virus scan
5) chkdsk
6) fsutil dirty query (drive is clean)
7) Shutdown

(On evil computer)
1) Startup
2) fsutil dirty query (drive is dirty)

The problem MUST be with the registry....

--Will
 

Retro2001

Senior member
Jun 20, 2000
767
0
0
The culprit was Spysweeper. It must have been crashing (silently) on shutdown, preventing the system from unmounting the drive cleanly.

Thanks for the suggestions.

--Will
 

porcorosso

Member
Feb 22, 2006
123
0
0
Congratulations! So, just to satisfy my curiosity, when the fsutil query showed a clean drive on the other computer, this disk was mounted as a slave, correct? Makes sense. Running the same image would cause the same problem at shutdown, but mounting as a slave wouldn't.

I'm glad you figured it out.

Regards,
Rossiter