What's the best free disk defragger, not in Windows, for NTFS and FAT drives/partitions?
in [Storage]
|
Prev: My 128 GB flash drive is not working
Next: What's the best free disk defragger, not in Windows, for NTFSand FAT drives/partitions?
From: Jerry Peters on 15 Dec 2009 17:07 Cronos <cronos(a)sphere.invalid> wrote: > Rod Speed wrote: > >> >> Nope, the other fundamental question is whether the measured >> difference is noticeable. If it isnt, its not worth worrying about. >> >> > > Whether you notice or not is beside the point because the benefit is > there and is measurable regardless of if you notice it or not. I can't > tell if my game is running at 24fps or 30fps but knowing it is running > at 30fps is preferable. Why does it matter if you can't tell the difference? Jerry
From: Jerry Peters on 15 Dec 2009 17:12 Don Lope de Aguirre <lost(a)amazon.invalid> wrote: > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:7oigmvF3q1uvkU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> Bet they wouldnt be able to pick it in a double blind trial. >> > > The one person on the web forum said they actually measured the difference > before and after defrag so kind of hard to argue with that claim unless they > were lying. > No it's not. How did this person measure the difference and most important how repeatable was the measurement? One measurement before and one after is not statistically valid. You'd need to make multiple measurements before and after and perform the standard tests for statistical validity. Jerry
From: BD on 15 Dec 2009 22:26 > Nope, not with most modern systems anymore. I've found one scenario where defragging has proven critical: I use a Windows Explorer 'replacement' called Directory Opus. One of the features I like about it is its ability to show, on the fly, the total space consumed by a directory and all its subdirectories. If there are enough subdirectories involved, that will end up with my machine grinding for a *long* time. The fix for this, assuming I want this functionality, is to 'defragment' the directories, as well as the files - rewriting them to the innermost tracks on the disk. This is something that most defraggers just won't do. I have only found *one* product that will relocate directories - Ultimate Defrag. Once I allow that tool to reorg my volume in this fashion, the heads don't need to move around the whole bloody disk surface to read the directories, and as a result, this little bit of functionality in Directory Opus is quick, and quiet. So I would agree, that under most circumstances it's doubtful whether regular defragging is essential. But it absolutely has its place, depending on your usage of the filesystem, and shouldn't be discounted altogether. BD.
From: Rod Speed on 15 Dec 2009 22:39 BD wrote: >> Nope, not with most modern systems anymore. > I've found one scenario where defragging has proven critical: No you havent. > I use a Windows Explorer 'replacement' called Directory Opus. > One of the features I like about it is its ability to show, on the fly, > the total space consumed by a directory and all its subdirectories. > If there are enough subdirectories involved, that will end up with > my machine grinding for a *long* time. Just because that app is completely fucked, proves nothing except that that app is completely fucked. > The fix for this, assuming I want this functionality, is > to 'defragment' the directories, as well as the files - > rewriting them to the innermost tracks on the disk. Directorys dont get fragged and fragmented files have no effect whatever on repeated mindless rereading of directorys anyway. > This is something that most defraggers just won't do. I have only > found *one* product that will relocate directories - Ultimate Defrag. > Once I allow that tool to reorg my volume in this fashion, > the heads don't need to move around the whole bloody > disk surface to read the directories, and as a result, this > little bit of functionality in Directory Opus is quick, and quiet. Obvious lie on the speed. And caching the directorys would have a much bigger effect anyway. > So I would agree, that under most circumstances > it's doubtful whether regular defragging is essential. Its not doubtful, its absolutely certain that it is not essential. > But it absolutely has its place, depending on your usage of the filesystem, Like hell it does. > and shouldn't be discounted altogether. Wrong, as always.
From: BD on 16 Dec 2009 02:28
> Wrong, as always. Oi. What are you, twelve? |