Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations derfloh on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Partitioned my slave drive as Dynamic Disk by accident & need it back

Status
Not open for further replies.

ocundale

Technical User
Joined
Sep 6, 2002
Messages
1
Location
GB
I recently partitioned my second HD, a Fujitsu 20GB into a "dynamic disk" in disk management (win2k) by accident. I need to get it back to normal, but my bios won't recignise it & says "examining parameters" for ages, then just says the slave drive is "Not Installed"
When I start up my PC it also says "Slave Drive ATAPI incompatible".
Because it wont recignize the drive, I cant change it back in win2k's disk management. I need to somehow partition it back to a normal drive, if you could help me then I would be very greatful.

Thanks

Oli
 
Doesn't 2k see the drive (it ignores the bios anyway - so as you set it up in 2k, it should still be accessible from 2k's disk management).

Also, what about recovery console - can you see disk from there?
 
If I remember correctly, There is a one way part from basic to dynamic disk structure....once you move to dynamic disks, there is no going back, short of using something like fdisk to completely wipe the drive and start over....

That being said, I think it is most prudent in you case to determine why you cannot see the drive. Windows 2000 should see the drive, no matter what the bios says, as you used Windows to Upgrade (not partition) the disk to dynamic structure.

I don't have any suggestions on where to look to help you out (sorry [smile]), but I definitely stress the fact that dynamic disks structure is MUCH better than basic disks in Windows 2000. If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it? - Albert Einstein [atom]

Robert L. Johnson III, A+, Network+, MCP
Access Developer/Programmer
robert.l.johnson.iii@citigroup.com
 
Robert,

'definitely stress the fact that dynamic disks structure is MUCH better than basic disks in Windows 2000'

Could you say in what way (I've been tempted to try, but as my main PC is multi-partition, multi-boot not really suitable), I'd be interested to know.

Thanks
 
Okay, I am working totally from memory here....

Basic Versus Dynamic.

The first, and possibly the greatest, beneift I have found adding to an alreadyc reated partition. With dynmaic disks, if your partition becomes full (in other words, your dive is full), you can "add" another partition to the end, thereby increasing the overall size of the partition. This can be done from any disk on your system....One note: you cannot increase/attach to the C (read as system) Drive.

For example...if you set up your D Drive to 4G and it is near full, on a basic disk, you must create an E Drive and start putting new data there. On a dynamic disk, you can simply put the new disk space "into" the existing D Drive partition, thereby making it larger and no longer near full.

The other major benifit I have encounter is access time. When I upgraded from basic to dynamic (which is the very first thing I do after installing windows), hard drive access time was cut down, by as much as 50%. I could actually see the access times drop....

I would suggest to anyone to check out the help files in windows 2000 about basic and dynamic disks, and look for other resources. I am currenly enrolled in a windows 2000 network adminstration class and we spent approx two weeks talking about this subject. There are some good resources out there. (I don't remember any off the top of my head though...sorry!) Check microsoft's web site, I beleive there is some explainations there.

Of course, my last comment will be the dreaded warning.....If you are considering moving from basic to dynamic disks, BACKUP! BACKUP! BACKUP! first. That way, if you decide dynamic disks is not for you, you have not lost all your data. If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it? - Albert Einstein [atom]

Robert L. Johnson III, A+, Network+, MCP
Access Developer/Programmer
robert.l.johnson.iii@citigroup.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top