Data Recovery and Disk Utilities Forum @R-TT

Hello Forum.

I am analysing an ext3fs disk (from an NAS) with the latest R-Studio for Linux eval.

The method "Scan detailed" reports 183177 filles in 70 folders
and the method "browsing" (clicking on the device or partition) reports 185416 files in 6881 folders

I expected that both approaches would report the same number of entries, or at least that "Scan detailed"
would find more entries...

What's the reason? Am i doing something wrong?

Thank's!

Linus

Not necessary. For example, there may be records of files that actually don't exist and never existed. Detailed scan counts such files out. But actual disk situation is impossible to estimate without seeing the actual data.

Hello.

But what could be the reason that restoring ("Scan detailes" -> Extra Files Found) does not recover the original file- and folder-name
as well? Am I doing something wrong?

Thank's a lot for any clarification!

Linus

PS
By the way: the right term for my "browsing" is "Open Drive Files"

I think this article may clarify the situation: File Recovery Basics: How Data Recovery Works.

Alt wrote:I think this article may clarify the situation: File Recovery Basics: How Data Recovery Works.

Sorry Alt for not reading the manual. My idea was, that R-Studio does not work with the header-/footer-approach.
Its clear to me that Raw file recovery methods normally are not able to recover folder-names ...


The(my) actual challenge will be, that "OpenDriveFIle" (Method One: File recovery through analysis of the info about files and folders)
does recover/report approx 250GB meanwhile "Scan"(Method Two: File recovery using search for known file types (raw file recovery))
does report over 5TB in the status line

E.g.:
R-Stuido Linux3.6 does recover many MP4 files (most of them 2,3GB in size) consisting on multiple MP3 fles (ext3fs / ext4fs)

Linus