this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2026
427 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

86252 readers
3553 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
427
Microsoft admits a Windows 11 bug is eating up to 500GB of storage, verify if you are affected. (www.windowslatest.com)
submitted 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) by Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
85 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Personally, I have never seen this many issues with Windows like today. Even way back in the Windows Vista days. Woah, Windows Vista will be 20 years old in November...

If you are forced to still be on Windows 11.

This file can be found in the following directory,

C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\CapabilityAccessManager\

Then see if it shows a huge file size.

Windows Latest found that one particular file called “CapabilityAccessManager.db-wal” can use most of your system storage.

If your PC is affected, the safest fix is to install Windows 11 KB5095093 from Windows Update, or wait for the July 2026 Patch Tuesday update, where the fix is expected to roll out automatically.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (3 children)

I messed up with one computer. It is a huge server with RAID on Windows 11 and like 100TB's of storage on it... No way I was going to risk it and accidentally erase the used storage while installing Linux. That is the only one on Windows 11 for me. If it was just 5TB's or something, I would just get an external hard drive to copy everything. But it is much more than that, not all of the 100TB's is used though. It has to sit on Windows 11.

[–] kalapala@sopuli.xyz 22 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Don't worry. Windows will auto update or update your storage driver and you will loose the data anyway! Good luck while it lasts.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 6 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Disconnect the drives and insert a new one and install Linux. Then reconnect the drives.

Or just unplug the SAS cable or whatever, depending on the hardware.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

That's the thing, will the new hardware read the RAID setup? OMG I think they are actually set up on legacy and GPT.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

That sounds like a problem that you should deal with even if you stay on Windows 😄 Maybe I just enjoy organizing things

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Do you have over 60TB's of storage that you need like me?

[–] teslekova@sh.itjust.works 5 points 13 hours ago

Well, is horse porn a want or a need?

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I do not and so I shouldn't be one to judge

Is it data that could be recovered if needed? That's where my concern is coming from. Not being able to back it up to fix OS issues might mean that you can't back it up at all

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Over 60,000 GB's. As stated, it is all in RAID. Unless I get a giant external one. Which I don't even know if that exists to buy. It would be super expensive if so.

[–] JaumeI@programming.dev 6 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Not talking here about Linux anymore. If you have the data in only one site, and the data is irreplaceable, you have a problem right now. Having it in a RAID gives you some breathing room, but you still should plan and execute a remote backup, somehow. At least for the really critical data. Fire, floods and other phenomena are hard or impossible to predict, and you could lose everything. If it's not that critical, and you simply don't want the hassle of moving 60TB, I can really empathize with that.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

True, if anything happens to the drives, it is fucked.