Upgraded to v2.74.
Phylock required reduce cache.
reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
v2.73 made image without phylock issue
why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
hime3
v2.74 phylock cache issue
-
TeraByte Support
- Posts: 3624
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:37 pm
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
the version of phylock hasn't changed, the version included with 2.73 and
2.74 are the same. To see what the error means (looking in the .log file
for the specific "PHYLock Error") :
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=551
"hime3" wrote in message news:3114@public.image...
Upgraded to v2.74.
Phylock required reduce cache.
reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
v2.73 made image without phylock issue
why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
hime3
2.74 are the same. To see what the error means (looking in the .log file
for the specific "PHYLock Error") :
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=551
"hime3" wrote in message news:3114@public.image...
Upgraded to v2.74.
Phylock required reduce cache.
reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
v2.73 made image without phylock issue
why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
hime3
-
mjnelson99
- Posts: 785
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:24 am
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
I don't always reinstall phylock myself.
I wonder if it would be worth doing that??
Mary
On 8/28/2012 6:50 PM, TeraByte Support wrote:
> the version of phylock hasn't changed, the version included with 2.73 and
> 2.74 are the same. To see what the error means (looking in the .log file
> for the specific "PHYLock Error") :
> http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=551
>
>
>
>
> "hime3" wrote in message news:3114@public.image...
>
> Upgraded to v2.74.
> Phylock required reduce cache.
> reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
> Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
> rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
> uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
> v2.73 made image without phylock issue
> why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
> hime3
>
>
I wonder if it would be worth doing that??
Mary
On 8/28/2012 6:50 PM, TeraByte Support wrote:
> the version of phylock hasn't changed, the version included with 2.73 and
> 2.74 are the same. To see what the error means (looking in the .log file
> for the specific "PHYLock Error") :
> http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=551
>
>
>
>
> "hime3" wrote in message news:3114@public.image...
>
> Upgraded to v2.74.
> Phylock required reduce cache.
> reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
> Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
> rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
> uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
> v2.73 made image without phylock issue
> why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
> hime3
>
>
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
Thank you Mary
updated to v2.74
did not install Phylock
image processed without incident
hime3
updated to v2.74
did not install Phylock
image processed without incident
hime3
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
I'm not quite following this. Are you saying the only way not to get your issue is to install the Phylock that comes with 2.73, even though the one that comes with 2.74 is the same? If so, that doesn't make any sense.
-
mjnelson99
- Posts: 785
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:24 am
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
Sometimes I would not reinstall phylock since it required
rebooting my computer.
Something like that might be the issue here.
Mary
On 8/29/2012 8:19 PM, rseiler wrote:
> I'm not quite following this. Are you saying the only way not to get your issue is to install the Phylock that comes with 2.73, even though the one that comes with 2.74 is the same? If so, that doesn't make any sense.
>
>
rebooting my computer.
Something like that might be the issue here.
Mary
On 8/29/2012 8:19 PM, rseiler wrote:
> I'm not quite following this. Are you saying the only way not to get your issue is to install the Phylock that comes with 2.73, even though the one that comes with 2.74 is the same? If so, that doesn't make any sense.
>
>
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:26:27 PDT, just as I was about to take a herb,
mjnelson99 disturbed my reverie and wrote:
>Sometimes I would not reinstall phylock since it required
>rebooting my computer.
I always reinstall PHYLock. AIUI, a reboot is only required if the
version changes (as is usually the case). With the recent 2.73>2.74
IfW update, a reboot was not needed (same version of PHYLock). I
assume that TBU modify PHYLock for a reason so always want the latest
version.
--
Cheers
DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).
mjnelson99 disturbed my reverie and wrote:
>Sometimes I would not reinstall phylock since it required
>rebooting my computer.
I always reinstall PHYLock. AIUI, a reboot is only required if the
version changes (as is usually the case). With the recent 2.73>2.74
IfW update, a reboot was not needed (same version of PHYLock). I
assume that TBU modify PHYLock for a reason so always want the latest
version.
--
Cheers
DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
On 2012-08-28 6:26 PM, hime3 wrote:
> Upgraded to v2.74.
> Phylock required reduce cache.
> reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
> Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
> rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
> uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
> v2.73 made image without phylock issue
> why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
> hime3
>
>
Not exactly understanding when, or if, Phylock gets automatically updated.
Sounds like (reading the posts) Phylock does not get updated (at my end)
unless I specifically install it separately.
If that's the case, and if Phylock is being upgraded periodically as is
IFW for example, then why doesn't Terabyte arrange to have new version
of Phylock installed along with install of IFW (automatically)?
Or at least inform the users (in IFW revision history for example) that
Phylock needs to be installed separately, or at least inform us when
Phylock updates.
Also, is there a Phylock revision history to be found?
Speaking of Phylock, how should I determine which version is actually
running?
AlanD
> Upgraded to v2.74.
> Phylock required reduce cache.
> reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
> Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
> rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
> uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
> v2.73 made image without phylock issue
> why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
> hime3
>
>
Not exactly understanding when, or if, Phylock gets automatically updated.
Sounds like (reading the posts) Phylock does not get updated (at my end)
unless I specifically install it separately.
If that's the case, and if Phylock is being upgraded periodically as is
IFW for example, then why doesn't Terabyte arrange to have new version
of Phylock installed along with install of IFW (automatically)?
Or at least inform the users (in IFW revision history for example) that
Phylock needs to be installed separately, or at least inform us when
Phylock updates.
Also, is there a Phylock revision history to be found?
Speaking of Phylock, how should I determine which version is actually
running?
AlanD
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
On Sun, 2 Sep 2012 06:34:53 PDT, just as I was about to take a herb,
AlanD disturbed my reverie and wrote:
>Not exactly understanding when, or if, Phylock gets automatically updated.
>Sounds like (reading the posts) Phylock does not get updated (at my end)
>unless I specifically install it separately.
I do a full install each time. Just set it to install and it will do
that every time you update IfW. If PHYLock is updated, one gets
prompted for a reboot AIUI.
>Speaking of Phylock, how should I determine which version is actually
>running?
Go to the PHYLock folder, and right click > properties on the file
that is appropriate for your OS.
--
Cheers
DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).
AlanD disturbed my reverie and wrote:
>Not exactly understanding when, or if, Phylock gets automatically updated.
>Sounds like (reading the posts) Phylock does not get updated (at my end)
>unless I specifically install it separately.
I do a full install each time. Just set it to install and it will do
that every time you update IfW. If PHYLock is updated, one gets
prompted for a reboot AIUI.
>Speaking of Phylock, how should I determine which version is actually
>running?
Go to the PHYLock folder, and right click > properties on the file
that is appropriate for your OS.
--
Cheers
DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).
-
mjnelson99
- Posts: 785
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:24 am
Re: v2.74 phylock cache issue
When I looked at the install programs,
Phylock WAS already checked to be installed.
Mary
On 9/2/2012 8:34 AM, AlanD wrote:
> On 2012-08-28 6:26 PM, hime3 wrote:
>> Upgraded to v2.74.
>> Phylock required reduce cache.
>> reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
>> Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
>> rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
>> uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
>> v2.73 made image without phylock issue
>> why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
>> hime3
>>
>>
> Not exactly understanding when, or if, Phylock gets automatically updated.
> Sounds like (reading the posts) Phylock does not get updated (at my end)
> unless I specifically install it separately.
>
> If that's the case, and if Phylock is being upgraded periodically as is
> IFW for example, then why doesn't Terabyte arrange to have new version
> of Phylock installed along with install of IFW (automatically)?
>
> Or at least inform the users (in IFW revision history for example) that
> Phylock needs to be installed separately, or at least inform us when
> Phylock updates.
>
> Also, is there a Phylock revision history to be found?
>
> Speaking of Phylock, how should I determine which version is actually
> running?
>
> AlanD
>
>
Phylock WAS already checked to be installed.
Mary
On 9/2/2012 8:34 AM, AlanD wrote:
> On 2012-08-28 6:26 PM, hime3 wrote:
>> Upgraded to v2.74.
>> Phylock required reduce cache.
>> reduced cache slightly; same phylock issue
>> Image made yesterday with v2.73 without phylock issue.
>> rather than experiment with cache and NTFS log sizes,
>> uninstalled v2.74, reinstalled v2.73
>> v2.73 made image without phylock issue
>> why might v 2.74 have the phylock issue?
>> hime3
>>
>>
> Not exactly understanding when, or if, Phylock gets automatically updated.
> Sounds like (reading the posts) Phylock does not get updated (at my end)
> unless I specifically install it separately.
>
> If that's the case, and if Phylock is being upgraded periodically as is
> IFW for example, then why doesn't Terabyte arrange to have new version
> of Phylock installed along with install of IFW (automatically)?
>
> Or at least inform the users (in IFW revision history for example) that
> Phylock needs to be installed separately, or at least inform us when
> Phylock updates.
>
> Also, is there a Phylock revision history to be found?
>
> Speaking of Phylock, how should I determine which version is actually
> running?
>
> AlanD
>
>