 howiePremium
join:2003-04-08
Antarctica
kudos:4 | 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 |
OZOPremium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2 | 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... |
