Is defraging necessary?
in [Windows XP]
|
From: RobertVA on 15 May 2010 11:33 On 5/15/2010 2:34 AM, Brian V wrote: > (snip) > > Those new HDD's that are flash drives, SSD I think, they don't need > defragmentation I saw in some tutorials. Since they are flash based, if I > defragment my flash memory cards or my memory sticks, is this a bad idea? > The motivation behind defragmenting is avoiding the time necessary for a mechanical drive head to shift to a different cylinder (track) and settle into place (they vibrate a little when they stop). On a fragmented drive you might have a constant situation where the head is shifting back and forth between two or more cylinders reading successive segments of a file. To a lesser extent the drive might have to wait for a particular file segment to rotate into position under the drive head. Since flash drives, SSDs and camera memory cards aren't dependent on rotating disks or heads shifting between cylinders, fragmentation would be significantly less of a delay (if any at all).
From: Leythos on 15 May 2010 11:42 In article <656B2B60-B186-4BF8-88F4-36451A9A6011(a)microsoft.com>, BrianV(a)discussions.microsoft.com says... > What about defragmentation with a RAID system? Doesn't this system eliminate > file defragmentation? I am under the impression that it is two copies of > everything (one on each drive), it is a faster (and ??more stable system??) > and more reliable system? > RAID, there are many types, has some performance benefits and some performance penalties: RAID-0 fast reads/writes, no redundancy RAID-1 fast reads/slow writes, redundant RAID-5 fast reads/slow writes, redundant RAID-0+1 fast reads/writes, redundant There are cases to use each one, no one type is best for everyone. All drives, arrays, become file fragmented, even if you keep the drives/arrays 50% empty or more, it just happens. The impact of fragmentation is also individual, meaning that some people will never feel the difference, others will notice a difference between very fragmented and not fragmented. I defragment by workstations every couple months, servers on weekends, but I'm only one type of user, you might need more or less. -- 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: Alias on 15 May 2010 11:47 On 05/15/2010 04:48 PM, Leythos wrote: > In article<hsm0s8$lkp$10(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > aka(a)hewhoismasked&anonymous.com says... >> >> On 05/15/2010 03:43 AM, Leythos wrote: >>> In article<4BEDCFD7.EE17E555(a)discussions.microsoft.com>, >>> LDS5ZRA(a)discussions.microsoft.com says... >>>> There is no evidence that defragging speeds up your system in any >>>> shape or form. No something you will notice it when using your >>>> system everyday. >>>> >>> >>> There is plenty of evidence that file defrag improves drive system >>> performance, only a person with limited experience would suggest >>> otherwise. >>> >>> >> >> My goodness, I agree with Leythos. What's the world coming to? > > Well, that will certainly harm my credibility, having you agree with > something I've written. > Poor baby. Do you think you'll get over it? -- Alias
From: Db on 15 May 2010 13:47 Defragging a system won't do you any harm so you should try it and make your own determination if it is a a worthwhile process. however, there was a time that defrag did improve performance for systems that had hard disks with limited drive space and had slow data access speeds. But nowadays hard drives are faster and larger and fragmentation is no longer a contributing factor in performance. as the matter of fact, technical documentation from microsoft pertaining to vista state that defragging disk is no longer necessary and "does not improve system performance". perhaps, it is because the computer turns right around and creates fragments of the data that was defrag's however, the quandary exists at microsoft because on the one hand the technicians have tested and made a thorough analysis on the ineffectiveness of defragging large and faster disks in vista, but at the same time microsoft includes a defragging utility in with the o.s. in any case, everyone has unique systems that benefit by unique methodologies. as stated before you can run defrag and ascertain a personal assessment of performance or if you born back when American culture was factually experiencing induced enlightenment, then you might find unfragmenting files to be entertaining. -- >> -- >> db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >> DatabaseBen, Retired Professional >> - Systems Analyst >> - Database Developer >> - Accountancy >> - Veteran of the Armed Forces >> - @Hotmail.com >> - nntp Postologist >> ~ "share the nirvana" - dbZen >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Lisa" <Lisa(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:1AA94818-B553-4478-9F58-668B6F68C348(a)microsoft.com... > I was told by a computer repairman that it's not necessary to defrag my > laptop. If the hard drive gets full, remove files and always make sure > I'm > using a virus protection. > What are your thoughts?
From: Unknown on 15 May 2010 14:25
How can you possibly state that fragmentation is no longer a factor in performance? If you ONLY had one fragment, it would add a minimum of 10 MS to a read operation. "Db" <databaseben(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:E5214409-74FB-4E90-BD58-D55FD009AFED(a)microsoft.com... > Defragging a system won't > do you any harm so you > should try it and make your > own determination if it is a > a worthwhile process. > > however, there was a time that > defrag did improve performance > for systems that had hard disks > with limited drive space and > had slow data access speeds. > > But nowadays hard drives > are faster and larger and > fragmentation is no longer > a contributing factor in > performance. > > as the matter of fact, technical > documentation from microsoft > pertaining to vista state that > defragging disk is no longer > necessary and "does not improve > system performance". > > perhaps, it is because the computer > turns right around and creates fragments > of the data that was defrag's > > > however, the quandary exists at > microsoft because on the one > hand the technicians have tested > and made a thorough analysis > on the ineffectiveness of defragging > large and faster disks in vista, > > but at the same time microsoft > includes a defragging utility in > with the o.s. > > in any case, everyone has > unique systems that benefit > by unique methodologies. > > as stated before you can run > defrag and ascertain a personal > assessment of performance > > or if you born back when American > culture was factually experiencing > induced enlightenment, > > then you might find unfragmenting > files to be entertaining. > > -- >>> -- >>> db���`�...�><)))�> >>> DatabaseBen, Retired Professional >>> - Systems Analyst >>> - Database Developer >>> - Accountancy >>> - Veteran of the Armed Forces >>> - @Hotmail.com >>> - nntp Postologist >>> ~ "share the nirvana" - dbZen >>> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > "Lisa" <Lisa(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:1AA94818-B553-4478-9F58-668B6F68C348(a)microsoft.com... >> I was told by a computer repairman that it's not necessary to defrag my >> laptop. If the hard drive gets full, remove files and always make sure >> I'm >> using a virus protection. >> What are your thoughts? > |