howie
Premium,MVM
join:2003-04-08
Little Falls, NJ
1 edit | reply to SafireDonkey
Re: [Update] PerfectDisk 2008 - Build 52
I'd have to disagree. A fragmented drive will cause more wear and tear than running defragmentation software on a regular basis. Highly fragmented drives cause the read/write heads to jump all over the platters as fragmented files are read. I have six year old 80GB drive that's been running almost daily and defragmented weekly (or more often) and it still has zero bad sectors.
--
N.Y. Giants - Super Bowl XLII Champions |
|
Anon00
Premium
join:2001-09-25
USA
| Thanks to all assisting me, I don't think its PD causing the issue. Hopefully I can track down the issue, otherwise I'll have to live with it as there's no indication there's any corruption going on.
--
"Ah, women. They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent." - Friedrich Nietzsche
"'It's the law' is just an excuse for the unintelligent and unimaginative to remain that way" - Me |
|
SafireDonkey
join:2006-10-29
89000
| reply to howie
said by howie  :I'd have to disagree. A fragmented drive will cause more wear and tear than running defragmentation software on a regular basis. Highly fragmented drives cause the read/write heads to jump all over the platters as fragmented files are read. I have six year old 80GB drive that's been running almost daily and defragmented weekly (or more often) and it still has zero bad sectors. Hi howie,
I think there is no better way of wearing and tearing than a background defragger than will constantly swap stuff on your HDs.;) |
|
howie
Premium,MVM
join:2003-04-08
Little Falls, NJ
| Hi, SD... I never use a background defragger so you may very well be right about that. I prefer to do a manual defrag every week or so and this normally takes just a few minutes. The only two drives I've lost since the mid-90's died within days/weeks of installation and I attribute this to defective drives.
--
N.Y. Giants - Super Bowl XLII Champions |
|
OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
| reply to SafireDonkey
You're making a good point. Running defragger may cause extra wear and tear. Actually, it depends on the strategy which that defragger enforces.
If a strategy is to conglomerate all files on one place (usually at the beginning of the partition) and, by doing so, make one big file-free space - it certainly will swap stuff on HD almost every time you run it (making unnecessary wear and tear for it). It's because one small free space that appears since the previous run will cause defragger to move all files beyond this point to make those files consolidated in one big chunk of files again...
I see that many of defraggers are implementing this strategy, including for example JkDefrag. It's pretty good defragger and I like it, but it's implementing the strategy above. And, as a result, I run it only once per several months. I do not need to move all files just for the sake of a move...
If defragger doesn't implement that strategy and makes only plain defragmentation job for files that need it - it's better, and I think it actually saves HD from extra wear and tear. But you have to watch and recognize that...
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself... |
|
Jeffrey
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-12-24
Dix Hills,NY
clubs:
 ·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Vonage
·magicjack.com
| reply to howie
said by howie :I'd have to disagree. A fragmented drive will cause more wear and tear than running defragmentation software on a regular basis. Highly fragmented drives cause the read/write heads to jump all over the platters as fragmented files are read. I have six year old 80GB drive that's been running almost daily and defragmented weekly (or more often) and it still has zero bad sectors. I agree with you. I had become lazy with defragging one of my drives that gets a lot of use. When I noticed it wasn't working quite as fast as it had in the past, I decided to defrag it, as I knew it had been a while. It was something like 50% fragmented. So, I ran Auslogics and got it down to 44%. Did it again, got in down to 42%. Did it one more time, was down to 41%. Realizing that I wasn't getting anywhere, I formatted the sucker, and started fresh. 
I think I'll be running the defrag 2x/month on that drive from now on.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. |
|
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Time Warner Cable
·Time Warner VOIP
4 edits | reply to howie
it might only gain me a few mbyte/s doing it so why bother at all
my does not work anyways
i also borke an drive 8 year old Western digital click, click, click....
it will work for 15 to 30 min's but i am too lazy to get any data off of it right now no Important Data just cd-keys etc...
after disk defragging
so your not safe :P ether way
i use disk keeper i got it for free with an computer that was free to me |
|
Dustyn
Premium
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
1 edit |  said by Anonymous_ : it might only gain me a few mbyte/s doing it so why bother at all my does not work anyways That seems messed up... 
Do you get any errors in the event log as to why Microsoft Disk Defragmentor fails to start? In could be that the Microsoft Defragementor program (which is essentially DK-Lite included with Windows XP/Vista) has been replaced with the current full featured version of Diskeeper that came installed on your system? Perhaps this is why Microsoft's Disk Defrag (DK-Lite) now fails to function?
For those who are interested I use PerfectDisk 2008 Build 52 on Vista Ultimate x64 and I have it set to perform a "daily smart defrag". Anytime I reboot my system... it boots into the OS usually within 25-30 seconds. Without a daily defrag my system begins to slow down and subsequent reboots take longer to get to the desktop. I suppose I could easily deal with a weekly defrag but... I like to keep my hard disk organized automatically and kept at peak performance. Perfect Disk keeps Vista Ultimate x64 running mean 'n lean! I've also tried JKDefrag on my other XP Home SP2 rig. For a free program it does a tremendous job at thoroughly defragging that PC! |
|
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Time Warner Cable
·Time Warner VOIP
2 edits | The device, \Device\Harddisk2\D, has a bad block.
For more information, see Help and Support Center at »go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
Product: Windows Operating System
ID: 7
Source: Disk
Version: 5.2 (formated with windows 2003)
Symbolic Name: IO_ERR_BAD_BLOCK
Message: The device, %1, has a bad block |
|
Dustyn
Premium
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
1 edit | said by Anonymous_ :The device, \Device\Harddisk2\D, has a bad block. For more information, see Help and Support Center at » go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. Product: Windows Operating System ID: 7 Source: Disk Version: 5.2 (formated with windows 2003) Symbolic Name: IO_ERR_BAD_BLOCK Message: The device, %1, has a bad block Looks like you hard drive has possible bad sectors on it which is why defragging is failing to run. |
|
