Cloned install boot issues

gregrocker said:

It is relevant because the paging file should be on the OS partition C. Turn it off and then back on to move it now. Virtual Memory Paging File - Change

What other ill-advised tweaks based on old-school rumours have been done?

If you have a WD or Seagate HD in the mix I'd start over and use the free premium Acronis cloning/imaging app which comes with either HD on their website Downloads page. The Manual is also there and easy to understand. Norton Ghost is old school by comparison.

Besides this the best reviews on moving OS onto SSD are for using SSD - Install and transfer the Operating System

sorry its not relevant, wherever the swap file is isnt going to cause the issue I described.

There is also no documentation stating the swap file has to be on c:, thats just where it defaults to. Its logical and common sense to have the swap file on a different physical drive. What is a bad move is to have no swap file at all, but there is nothing wrong with having it on a different drive. I do have a swap file on my C: drive by the way.

Kaktussoft said:

chrysalis said:

I am still seeing 2 issues, both I think related to the lettering and cloning.

1 - is the resource monitor under the disk tab shows weird drive lettering for running apps. posting pic on this post. it sayd D:0 instead of C:.

2 - is that apps in the windows firewall which have allow rules based on the app location are been blocked, this I think is related to #1 that the raw drive letter is incorrect even if appears as C: in explorer.

Take a look at your resource monitor screenshot! Do you see D, H, R are on disk 0!! But R is fake on disk 0??

Is windows on R?? Please disable ramdisk... at least temporary.... and test again

No thats windows getting confused.

R is a ramdisk, it is not on a physical drive. That same issue occured when I had the ramdisk before the clone.

I have turned it off to test and it had no affect on this issue.

chrysalis said:

sorry its not relevant, wherever the swap file is isnt going to cause the issue I described.

There is also no documentation stating the swap file has to be on c:, thats just where it defaults to. Its logical and common sense to have the swap file on a different physical drive. What is a bad move is to have no swap file at all, but there is nothing wrong with having it on a different drive. I do have a swap file on my C: drive by the way.

Are you confused that this is not a Linux OS?

I wouldn't have mentioned it if it hadn't come up before in the countless thousands of cases we've helped with here since before WIn7 was released.

Gradually we've seen the old-school advice to move paging file to another HD disappear, including the tutorials. You'll notice I had to go to VistaForums to get a tutorial to show you how to move it back.

gregrocker said:

chrysalis said:

sorry its not relevant, wherever the swap file is isnt going to cause the issue I described.

There is also no documentation stating the swap file has to be on c:, thats just where it defaults to. Its logical and common sense to have the swap file on a different physical drive. What is a bad move is to have no swap file at all, but there is nothing wrong with having it on a different drive. I do have a swap file on my C: drive by the way.

Are you confused that this is not a Linux OS?

I wouldn't have mentioned it if it hadn't come up before in the countless thousands of cases we've helped with here since before WIn7 was released.

Gradually we've seen the old-school advice to move paging file to another HD disappear, including the tutorials. You'll notice I had to go to VistaForums to get a tutorial to show you how to move it back.

I dont want to disable my D: swap I want to know why I have a wrong drive letter in a windows tool. The 2 have nothing to do with each other. Aside from this issue tho there is a swapfile already on C: anyway.

Also it may surprise you that if I move my swap files, I dont move it because some website told me to, I move it because of my own experience and knowledge of how things work.

In simple terms 2 devices can handle more i/o than one device. It was moved because the installation was originally on a hdd and clearly I would get a performance improvement from having the pagefile on a different physical device.

As it stands after reading your comment I did google and there is guides and such that reccomend moving the pagefile, including a microsoft developer. I think you may have got confused with that its bad to move the pagefile to a different partition on the same physical disk. But even more so you have got side tracked to talking about my pagefile over a completely different problem when my pagefile isnt even a problem.

For peace of mind I have disabled the D: swap file for now. As I am also reevaluating its use now anyway now I have a ssd for C: as clearly a ssd be faster for swap than a hdd.

Kaktussoft said:

Temporary disconnect disk 0,2,3,4 and boot. Same problem?
So even problems if only SSD attached (and no ramdisk)?

probably too much work, the poor access to the cables makes this extremely diffilcult, just removing the 1st sata cable earlier was just about doable, the 2nd and 3rd hdd's would quite possibly take hours to plug back in again.

The ramdisk has no affect tho.

My hunch is removing all the drives would possibly fix it as long as they remain unplugged. But my hunch is also as soon as they go back in again it would revert back. If I fix the firewall issue I will probably ignore this as it only shows up in resource monitor and then at some point try and do a clean OS reinstall when I have several days free as in my case I would have tons of apps to reconfigure, as well as windows settings and tuning.

How many of the search results recommend running two Page files, one on a FAT partition?

Since you've taken no one's advice here but only given your own, I suggest you know what's best for your system with it's too many HD's plugged in to any longer access any to unplug.

For others wishing to learn, always unplug all other HD's when cloning or imaging over the OS, use a modern tool recommended here like Win7 backup imaging, Acronis' premium imaging/cloning app (free with any Seagate or WD in the mix), Macrium Reflect, or Paragon's special app in SSD - Install and transfer the Operating System.

After cloning/imaging unplug the source HD, make sure the SSD is set first to boot in BIOS setup, don't expect it to always boot. If not confirm the 100mb SysReserved (preferred) or Win7 partitions are Marked Active then run Startup Repair - Run 3 Separate Times until it starts.

When you plug the source and other HD's back in, if you wish to keep another OS bootable, use the one-time BIOS Boot Menu key to boot it. Otherwise all other Active partitions should be Marked Inactive, old OS or SysReserved partitions deleted. If any HD continues to interfere, move its data off to wipe with Diskpart Clean Command to clear the boot sector.

Basically do the above, and none of what the OP has done and persists in doing.

Unsubscribed.

You havent given any reason as to why one should only ever run one swap file and only ever on a C: drive.

I believe you simply advise it simply because its the default and microsoft knows best. I am interested to know what issues have been resolved by doing that as you stated that it has resolved 1000s of cases? that sounds very exaggerated. What are these cases?

Obviously if someone gives me advice on anything generally I expect there to be a reason backing it up if I question it. However even tho I did disable the 2nd swap file and it had zero affect on the problem you seem to have thrown a mardy and gone away so thanks for your time anyway.

The reason I cant access the hdd cables is due to case layout and yes my number of hdds. There is a fan in front of my bottom bay of hdds, the way they mount is the back of the hdds where cables plug in is next to a fan, it took several hours work to get those cables in without obstructing airflow and without hitting the spinning as its an incredibly tight fit, simply unplugging any of those cables upsets that likewise changing any of the hdd's or putting a new one in. This leaves the other ends of the cables on the motherboard, sadly that isnt too easy either, its a web of cables covering a very small area, unplugging all at once would first cause an issue of remembering to put them back in the right order of slots, and then the issue of very hard to access the slots without taking out my soundcard, probably also lifting my heavy case onto my bed so the board is facing up (got bad back so not viable) and removing the cables also risks upsetting their placement near the hdd's fan. Ideally I want to get a better designed case for large numers of hdds but I havent got round to that yet.

Clearly cloning isnt that simple due to the windows process of identifiying and lettering hdd's, for those with easy access to their cables and especially if they dont have many drives maybe it is but not for everyone.

Also for all the guides I have read (and there isnt that many good ones and they not consistent with each other) on cloning you are the first to say all hdd's should be unplugged, whilst I agree now knowing how windows gets confused that is the best thing, any guides I have read have only stated to remove the original boot drive not every single hdd, so its a bit off to expect people to be psychic and assume they should unplug all drives.

fat vs ntfs?

Any research would tell you why the swap partition is fat, I have no need for data consistency and hence went for the fastest filesystem for that partition size. Regardless the swap is no longer there, sorry this proposed fix had no affect.

Also I couldnt make a active partition inactive, I see no option in disk management to do that, so the old system reserved partition I simply deleted insted, the original windows partition has already been deleted and remade into a new documents partition, so all remnants of the old windows partitions are gone.

If you right click on the partition in the graphic area you can swap active/inactive.

FYI on pagefile: used to do the same thing on a few machines. Separate and maybe faster disk, outer edge partition, separate IDE channel, FAT32 vs NTFS, etc. To be honest I never noticed a measurable benefit when formatted with FAT32 vs. NTFS. And I no longer bother with it at all any longer. It could be just the way my machines get used, it could be that hardware (non-SSD) has been so much improved, whatever it is I don't see the benefit in bothering with it. At least nothing measurable after the XP days (and the hardware/software used at that time).