Prev: Right mouse button stopped working
Next: Why is "Local Settings" folder NOT shown in WinExplorer ?
From: Unknown on 5 Jul 2010 15:50
You had best get informed rather than opinionated.
"HeyBub" <heybub(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:umZ9RdHHLHA.5920(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Unknown wrote:
>> Never needed is completely erroneous. It depends on how fragmented
>> the drive is. An occasional defrag is beneficial
>> in more than one way.
>
> You're right. When I said "defrag is never needed" (on an NTFS drive), I
> was exaggerating for the purpose of emphasis. For the average home user,
> once every three to five years may help to a modest degree.
>
> Oh, and the number of fragment on an NTFS system is irrelevant to the file
> system's efficiency.
>


From: Leythos on 5 Jul 2010 15:58
In article <umZ9RdHHLHA.5920(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, heybub(a)gmail.com
says...
>
> Unknown wrote:
> > Never needed is completely erroneous. It depends on how fragmented
> > the drive is. An occasional defrag is beneficial
> > in more than one way.
>
> You're right. When I said "defrag is never needed" (on an NTFS drive), I was
> exaggerating for the purpose of emphasis. For the average home user, once
> every three to five years may help to a modest degree.
>
> Oh, and the number of fragment on an NTFS system is irrelevant to the file
> system's efficiency.

You can't possibly make that assumption without a clear set of defining
characteristics for "Average Home User".

In the case of many "Average Home Users" that do music, video, games,
etc... a defrag every 6 months or so is beneficial, YES, for NTFS, since
it becomes highly fragmented after mass changes to files sizes and
additions/deletions.

You might want to get a LOT more experience in home users computers as
well as servers (both on NTFS) to understand the performance impact of
file fragmentation.

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
spam999free(a)rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
From: Paul on 5 Jul 2010 17:35
Roy S wrote:
> In working with Norton Tech, I found Norton 360 uses Windows defragger and
> there appears to be a problem with it in that a clean defragged disk reads
> very high with it. Does anyone know a fix for Windows degrag analyzer?
>
> "Roy S" wrote:
>
>> I am not able to improve defrag of my laptop hard drive with 27%
>> defragmentation per analysis using Windows or Norton 360 software. Do I need
>> to reformat the hard drive and perform reinstallation? Any suggestions?
>>

I have a technique for defragging, that doesn't use a defragmentation program.
I use "backup, re-initialize_partition, restore" as a means to fix up the
partition. I just did the procedure, and it took me about 2 hours. One
disadvantage of the method, is it can't be scripted, and requires
error-prone manual intervention. The 2 hour time, includes doing a
backup of C:, sector by sector, to ensure nothing can be lost if there
are problems.

This is my defragmentation report, after having just done the procedure.
This is the third time I've done this, since installing WinXP.

********************************************************************************
Volume WINXP (C:)
Volume size = 72.56 GB
Cluster size = 32 KB
Used space = 49.31 GB
Free space = 23.25 GB
Percent free space = 32 %

Volume fragmentation
Total fragmentation = 0 %
File fragmentation = 0 %
Free space fragmentation = 0 %

File fragmentation
Total files = 176,471
Average file size = 244 KB
Total fragmented files = 1
Total excess fragments = 1
Average fragments per file = 1.00

Pagefile fragmentation
Pagefile size = 2.00 GB
Total fragments = 1

Folder fragmentation
Total folders = 13,379
Fragmented folders = 69
Excess folder fragments = 91

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fragments File Size Most fragmented files
2 2 MB \WINDOWS\WindowsUpdate.log
********************************************************************************

My colored graph consists of a green bar (which could be the pagefile),
a white area of equal size (room for hiberfil.sys?). A large blue bar,
a white gap, and another large blue bar. There are no red bars to be seen,
although there should be one for the WindowsUpdate file, which already
got fragmented when Windows booted.

You can make it easier for the Windows defragmenter to do its job,
by arranging for a larger percentage of free space on the drive.
You can also look at using a third-party defragmentation tool.

There are forums where you can find discussions and comments from users.

http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-13629-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=317742&messageID=3167455&tag=leftCol;post-717

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defragmentation_software

Paul
From: Twayne on 7 Jul 2010 16:21
In news:%23NoLy2bGLHA.1996(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl,
Randem <newsgroups(a)randem.com> typed:
> either use a smarter program like SmartDefrag or find the
> settings in the program that you use to achieve better
> positioning.

BS - without knowing WHAT is still fragmented, no accurate guesses can be
made. Both programs indicated as having been used are good and would/should
defrag the disk just fine.

HTH,

Twayne`


From: Randem on 7 Jul 2010 16:32
That is EXACTLY why one should use a smarter program that tells of such
information...

Try doing the work instead of guessing and giving wrong answers expecially
trying to debunk others...

A little work and proof keeps bad answers at bay...

--
The Top Script Generator for Jordan Russell's Inno Setup -
http://www.randem.com/innoscript.html
Free Utilities and Code - http://www.randem.com/freesoftutil.html


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Right mouse button stopped working
Next: Why is "Local Settings" folder NOT shown in WinExplorer ?