Re: The Compressed (zipped) Folder is invalid or corrupted
- From: "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:35:41 -0500
Shenan,
I do think that you have nailed it here.
Thinking back I remember reading that when zipping, a temporary file is
created. That temp file is then compared (CRC check) with the original
files. If the compare is OK, then the original files are deleted (if you
choose this option) and the temp file is written to the end location. Then
the temp file is deleted also. I believe this occurs with PKZip.
You need more than double the free space of the size of the files you are
trying to zip. 60 gig would mean 120 gig of free space on a single drive.
What a workout for the hard drive.
In any event, it's an awful lot of processing for any standard computer to
go through with 60 gig of information being zipped up. No wonder there was a
failure.
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
"Shenan Stanley" <newshelper@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:O%237kavvGGHA.344@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Warren Brackmann wrote:
> <snip>
>> I am basically looking for a service or utility that could "pick"
>> through the bits/bytes in sectors, thus possibly circumventing the
>> File System type access to the disk/files (or whatever the problem
>> is), and possibly restore or partially restore what's in the 5 gig
>> showing for the size of the corrupted Archive_01 folder. Maybe
>> such a thing exists and maybe it doesn't (which would surprise me).
>>
>> To answer the question of, 'Where is that listed as the "supposedly
>> accepted Microsoft XP method ."?
>> Go to:
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;306531
>> Then click on
>> How Use Password Protection
>
> Your mistake is in believing this was a better method than file/folder
> permissions or that it was capable of doing such a large amount of data -
> I suppose. I can see where one would make this mistake - as other posters
> said - I cannot find any mention of such limitations. It is only using my
> gut feelings that I would not venture to make 60GB of data into a ZIP
> file.
>
> Again - this is compression - like WinZip would do - in fact - no
> different at all - same algorithms I believe. This includes the password
> protection that you can add to this. You are not creating a folder - the
> built in Windows compression algortihms make it LOOK this way. And with
> 60GB of data - no way I would trust that over a less intrusive method like
> file/folder permissions. Albeit those are not as portable - but a 60GB
> file is not exactly portable. *grin*
>
>> Also note that I was NOT using "Disk Compression" and all my
>> storage drives are NTFS format.
>
> No one said you were. But if your purpose was not just to password
> protect (which a similar end could have been reached through file/folder
> permissions - and a safer method indeed.) but to also save space - then
> NTFS compression would have been your best bet combined with file and
> directory permissions.
>
>> My guess is that "zipping" a file
>> or folder only "compresses" the data.
>
> You are correct. ZIP, RAR, etc. All compression algorithms - and not
> something I would do unless trying to save space. There are better ways
> of protecting data than compressing them and risking (especially with that
> much data) losing some information in the process. =)
>
>> It likely does not "encrypt"
>> the data. Encryption normally requires a "key", which a password
>> could possibly serve as; however, I never got to the part of
>> providing a password.
>
> No - you did not and no - it was not encrypting it. It was taking
> everything you told it to and putting it into one compressed file.. One
> extremely large compressed file. I believe - thginking back - your
> probelm may simply be that in order to properly compress I think you need
> as much disk space available as you are compressing.. So if you were
> compressing 60GB - I hope it was on a 120+GB hard drive.
>
>> To reiterate, only that one zipped folder is messed up ("invalid or
>> corrupted"). The rest of the drive and file system on that NTFS
>> formatted drive works perfectly well.
>
> Yes - but according to your story - that "file" contains almost 60GB of
> your data. Most of that data MOVED from the said drive. There is nothing
> likely wrong with your hard drive.
>
>> So, I was wondering if someone out there knows of some way I might
>> be able to totally or partially access the data in the "corrupted"
>> folder, OR if I'm just plain out of luck? Is there possibly
>> another forum or information source I should go to?
>
> I pointed you to a resource.
> A quick search (Google) for "fix invalid or corrupt
> zip file" does show hope - but i have no experience in this matter.
>
> Chances are - you are out of luck - but filter through the google searches
> and try some products - see what they find. You have less to lose now
> than you did a few days ago. =)
>
> --
> Shenan Stanley
> MS-MVP
> --
> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
.
- References:
- Re: The Compressed (zipped) Folder is invalid or corrupted
- From: Richard Urban
- Re: The Compressed (zipped) Folder is invalid or corrupted
- From: Warren Brackmann
- Re: The Compressed (zipped) Folder is invalid or corrupted
- From: Shenan Stanley
- Re: The Compressed (zipped) Folder is invalid or corrupted
- Prev by Date: Re: cws.msconfig and Trend Micro
- Next by Date: Re: Chkdsk utility
- Previous by thread: Re: The Compressed (zipped) Folder is invalid or corrupted
- Next by thread: mount a virtual Folder
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
