Windows 2000 Need to delete unmanageable Badmail directory

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charles Lavin
  • Start date Start date
"ZVR" <no_spam_ever@me.net> wrote in message
news:47716e68$0$26990$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
> Try this tool here, it may help. I have used it once in a similar
> scenario, not that many files though. Good luck, and just out of pure
> curiosity let us know if it helped :-)
>
> http://www.snapfiles.com/get/massdireraser.html
>

Is this a safe and proven tool or is there a risk of it
trashing the file system?
 
"Charles Lavin" <x@x.x> wrote:

>What program will be loaded more than a half-million times? I'm using del.
>When did del become an external program?

See . . . that's what I get for working with *nix.

Still, the overhead of the directory searches will be a killer since
each execution will start searching afresh.

--
Rich Matheisen
MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
MS Exchange FAQ at http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Don't send mail to this address mailto:h.pott@getronics.com
Or to these, either: mailto:h.pott@pinkroccade.com mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@getronics.com mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@pinkroccade.com
 
Define "safe and proven". Nothing is ABSOLUTELY guaranteed in this life, or
the next. As I said I have it used once before, and it was much faster than
regular methods. If that is not enough for you, feel free to revert to the
"safe and proven" DEL *.* or RD /S /Q.

Also if I can point it out to you, the "safe and proven" requirement
conflicts blatantly with your constant asking for a "fast" method of getting
rid of those files. I think it's time to decide what your priorities are.


"Pegasus (MVP)" <I.can@fly.com.oz> wrote in message
news:%23%23Hd0kzRIHA.748@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "ZVR" <no_spam_ever@me.net> wrote in message
> news:47716e68$0$26990$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>> Try this tool here, it may help. I have used it once in a similar
>> scenario, not that many files though. Good luck, and just out of pure
>> curiosity let us know if it helped :-)
>>
>> http://www.snapfiles.com/get/massdireraser.html
>>
>
> Is this a safe and proven tool or is there a risk of it
> trashing the file system?
>
 
"ZVR" <no_spam_ever@me.net> wrote in message
news:47726c66$0$20141$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
> Define "safe and proven". Nothing is ABSOLUTELY guaranteed in this life,
> or the next. As I said I have it used once before, and it was much faster
> than regular methods. If that is not enough for you, feel free to revert
> to the "safe and proven" DEL *.* or RD /S /Q.
>
> Also if I can point it out to you, the "safe and proven" requirement
> conflicts blatantly with your constant asking for a "fast" method of
> getting rid of those files. I think it's time to decide what your
> priorities are.

You're addressing the wrong guy. I'm not the OP.

I have several degrees of "safe and proven":

Very safe = It's a native Windows tool.
Quite safe = It is a popular tool with a long track record.
Risky = No known track record.

I will use a risky tool on a workstation but only if I have a
recent partition image that I could use in case things go
wrong. On a server I would not use a risky tool - the risks
far outweigh the possible benefits.
 
> You're addressing the wrong guy. I'm not the OP.

That's right, sorry about that.

> I have several degrees of "safe and proven":

So do I, I really thought I was responding to the OP and just wanted to
point out that usually things can be done the fast way or the safe way, and
it's up to each to decide what they need most. Again, sorry for the
misunderstanding.
 
Like I mentioned before, the time it was taking a "del *.*" to enumerate the
directory was leaving it susceptible to aborts that resulted in nothing
actually being deleted.

The server finished wiping out the directory, releasing about 7 GB of disk
space. At anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand bytes per file, that
was a lot of junk in there ...

CL

"Pegasus (MVP)" <I.can@fly.com.oz> wrote in message
news:OMRihcyRIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> "del" is an internal program. However, each application of "del"
> involves a "seek" process, which takes a lot of time in a large
> directory. If you use a wildcard then the seek process happens
> just once.
>
> Here is a quick demonstration. I created a folder with 10,000
> files inside. I then cleared it in two ways:
> a) I got a batch file to execute 10,000 individual "del" commands.
> b) I used the usual del *.* command.
>
> Results:
> a) 37 seconds
> b) 7.4 seconds
>
> I suggest you try it for yourself.
>
> "Charles Lavin" <x@x.x> wrote in message
> news:0515DCE2-45FA-43BE-9A06-2AEB1AA513C3@microsoft.com...
>> What program will be loaded more than a half-million times? I'm using
>> del. When did del become an external program?
>>
>>
>> "Rich Matheisen [MVP]" <richnews@rmcons.com.NOSPAM.COM> wrote in message
>> news:k340n3pm398p7gba28kdghqv69gihnd830@4ax.com...
>>> "Charles Lavin" <x@x.x> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Rich Matheisen [MVP]" <richnews@rmcons.com.NOSPAM.COM> wrote in message
>>>>news:909um3l3vfgr21vdm45m6br5ue3m9gtoku@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>> With that many files in the directory you are.
>>>>
>>>>That's the rub -- I had _no idea_ that there were that many files in
>>>>there.
>>>>I _still_ don't know how many files there are in there. That folder is
>>>>also
>>>>apparently the cause of problems we've had with Disk Cleanup and Error
>>>>Checking.
>>>>
>>>>That "dir > \badmail.txt" run I stopped after two-and-some hours and 47
>>>>MB
>>>>of .txt file resulted in a list of 632,131 files. And I think that
>>>>barely
>>>>scratched the surface. I converted that .txt file into a batch file with
>>>>632,131 del calls -- that way the system doesn't have to enumerate
>>>>anything,
>>>>and I can at least verify that it's doing something. I ended it with
>>>>another
>>>>redirected dir call to see what's left in there. I see that this is
>>>>going to
>>>>take days to resolve ...
>>>
>>> I think that batch file will finish around New Year's day! Not only
>>> will the program be loaded more than a half-million times, each
>>> execution will have to find the file in the mass of file names in that
>>> directory before it can delete it.
>>>
>>> Just do the DEL *.* and let it run. If it takes a couple of days, so
>>> what?
>>>
>>> As an alternative, I suppose you could make a backup of the disk and
>>> then fdisk it, format it, and restore everything except that
>>> directory. I'd just let the DEL run, though.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rich Matheisen
>>> MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
>>> MS Exchange FAQ at http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
>>> Don't send mail to this address mailto:h.pott@getronics.com
>>> Or to these, either: mailto:h.pott@pinkroccade.com
>>> mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@getronics.com
>>> mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@pinkroccade.com
>>
>
>
 
But I wasn't dealing with a folder with 10,000 entries. At last count, there
were close to 2 million files in there.


"Pegasus (MVP)" <I.can@fly.com.oz> wrote in message
news:%23XutYdyRIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> BTW, using "rd /s /q" took just 4.2 seconds.
>
> "Charles Lavin" <x@x.x> wrote in message
> news:0515DCE2-45FA-43BE-9A06-2AEB1AA513C3@microsoft.com...
>> What program will be loaded more than a half-million times? I'm using
>> del. When did del become an external program?
>>
>>
>> "Rich Matheisen [MVP]" <richnews@rmcons.com.NOSPAM.COM> wrote in message
>> news:k340n3pm398p7gba28kdghqv69gihnd830@4ax.com...
>>> "Charles Lavin" <x@x.x> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Rich Matheisen [MVP]" <richnews@rmcons.com.NOSPAM.COM> wrote in message
>>>>news:909um3l3vfgr21vdm45m6br5ue3m9gtoku@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>> With that many files in the directory you are.
>>>>
>>>>That's the rub -- I had _no idea_ that there were that many files in
>>>>there.
>>>>I _still_ don't know how many files there are in there. That folder is
>>>>also
>>>>apparently the cause of problems we've had with Disk Cleanup and Error
>>>>Checking.
>>>>
>>>>That "dir > \badmail.txt" run I stopped after two-and-some hours and 47
>>>>MB
>>>>of .txt file resulted in a list of 632,131 files. And I think that
>>>>barely
>>>>scratched the surface. I converted that .txt file into a batch file with
>>>>632,131 del calls -- that way the system doesn't have to enumerate
>>>>anything,
>>>>and I can at least verify that it's doing something. I ended it with
>>>>another
>>>>redirected dir call to see what's left in there. I see that this is
>>>>going to
>>>>take days to resolve ...
>>>
>>> I think that batch file will finish around New Year's day! Not only
>>> will the program be loaded more than a half-million times, each
>>> execution will have to find the file in the mass of file names in that
>>> directory before it can delete it.
>>>
>>> Just do the DEL *.* and let it run. If it takes a couple of days, so
>>> what?
>>>
>>> As an alternative, I suppose you could make a backup of the disk and
>>> then fdisk it, format it, and restore everything except that
>>> directory. I'd just let the DEL run, though.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rich Matheisen
>>> MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
>>> MS Exchange FAQ at http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
>>> Don't send mail to this address mailto:h.pott@getronics.com
>>> Or to these, either: mailto:h.pott@pinkroccade.com
>>> mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@getronics.com
>>> mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@pinkroccade.com
>>
>
>
 
If this had been a Unix machine, I would have figured out far more efficient
and quicker ways of wiping out that folder! <g>

I got the job done. The overhead of repeated single del calls might have
been more than we would have wished for, but we did get the folder emptied
one file at a time. I tried a few del *.*s, but came back to find the run
had mysteriously aborted and no discernible change in the amount of free
disk space.

CL

"Rich Matheisen [MVP]" <richnews@rmcons.com.NOSPAM.COM> wrote in message
news:vgs2n3lh3aub78eu8jokak78j7imnpsrm6@4ax.com...
> "Charles Lavin" <x@x.x> wrote:
>
>>What program will be loaded more than a half-million times? I'm using del.
>>When did del become an external program?
>
> See . . . that's what I get for working with *nix.
>
> Still, the overhead of the directory searches will be a killer since
> each execution will start searching afresh.
>
> --
> Rich Matheisen
> MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
> MS Exchange FAQ at http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Don't send mail to this address mailto:h.pott@getronics.com
> Or to these, either: mailto:h.pott@pinkroccade.com
> mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@getronics.com
> mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@pinkroccade.com
 
ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I went NUTS looking for something like this the other day, and didn't find
anything that would work ... This is EXACTLY what I was looking for. Oh well
.... the job is done. But I'll keep this for future reference!

Thanks!
CL

"ZVR" <no_spam_ever@me.net> wrote in message
news:47716e68$0$26990$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
> Try this tool here, it may help. I have used it once in a similar
> scenario, not that many files though. Good luck, and just out of pure
> curiosity let us know if it helped :-)
>
> http://www.snapfiles.com/get/massdireraser.html
>
>
 
I think you're getting your posters mixed up ... <g>


"ZVR" <no_spam_ever@me.net> wrote in message
news:47726c66$0$20141$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
> Define "safe and proven". Nothing is ABSOLUTELY guaranteed in this life,
> or the next. As I said I have it used once before, and it was much faster
> than regular methods. If that is not enough for you, feel free to revert
> to the "safe and proven" DEL *.* or RD /S /Q.
>
> Also if I can point it out to you, the "safe and proven" requirement
> conflicts blatantly with your constant asking for a "fast" method of
> getting rid of those files. I think it's time to decide what your
> priorities are.
>
>
> "Pegasus (MVP)" <I.can@fly.com.oz> wrote in message
> news:%23%23Hd0kzRIHA.748@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "ZVR" <no_spam_ever@me.net> wrote in message
>> news:47716e68$0$26990$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>>> Try this tool here, it may help. I have used it once in a similar
>>> scenario, not that many files though. Good luck, and just out of pure
>>> curiosity let us know if it helped :-)
>>>
>>> http://www.snapfiles.com/get/massdireraser.html
>>>
>>
>> Is this a safe and proven tool or is there a risk of it
>> trashing the file system?
>>
>
>
 
Hey -- I was willing to manually zero out the directory and let scandisk
pick up the pieces ... :-)

This is a machine that's being decommissioned. I had a full, verified
backup. If it had saved me the days of grief we ultimately wasted (which
resulted in the postponement of the actual migration for two weeks), you bet
I would have "risked" this tool. I desperately needed the disk space. And I
didn't want the slightest risk of this folder being migrated to the new box.
Plus, the sheer size of the file table was getting in the way of everything
else we were attempting to do ...

CL



"ZVR" <no_spam_ever@me.net> wrote in message
news:4772a347$0$5151$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>> You're addressing the wrong guy. I'm not the OP.
>
> That's right, sorry about that.
>
>> I have several degrees of "safe and proven":
>
> So do I, I really thought I was responding to the OP and just wanted to
> point out that usually things can be done the fast way or the safe way,
> and it's up to each to decide what they need most. Again, sorry for the
> misunderstanding.
>
>
 
Back
Top