SafireDonkey
join:2006-10-29
89000
1 edit | [Discussion] Defragging Opinions The ultimate harddisk destroyer. | |
|
 
howie
Premium,MVM
join:2003-04-08
Little Falls, NJ
1 edit | 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
| Re: [Update] PerfectDisk 2008 - Build 52 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
| 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
| Re: [Update] PerfectDisk 2008 - Build 52 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
| 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
| 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. | |
|
| |
| | |
| | | |
| | | | 
Dustyn
Premium
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
1 edit | Re: [Update] PerfectDisk 2008 - Build 52 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. | |
|
|
bruzzes
Premium
join:2001-04-26
Euclid, OH
·RoadRunner Cable
| I defrag at an average of 10-20 times per week.
I have done so since 1993 with two computers owned over that time span.
Each computer has been used for over 7 years before being replaced.
I have been following these types of discussions for 15 years.
I have never had a hard drive problem.
--
"Where am I" I asked. "Your on the Island of Conclusions" he replied. "How did I get here?" said I. "Why you jumped here, of course" | |
|
| |
| | bruzzes
Premium
join:2001-04-26
Euclid, OH
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: [Discussion] Defragging Opinions said by La Luna :said by bruzzes :I defrag at an average of 10-20 times per week.... Out of curiosity, why so often?  No real reason...
Maybe the one offered by another poster is as good as another...
The point being that excessive defraging does not neccesarily toast a hard drive.
(I love general statements)
For myself, there seems to be little if any measurable improvement whether one defrags every day or once a month with XP.
--
"Where am I" I asked. "Your on the Island of Conclusions" he replied. "How did I get here?" said I. "Why you jumped here, of course" | |
|
| quatrix
Premium
join:2005-02-11
Davie, FL
| said by bruzzes :I defrag at an average of 10-20 times per week. I have done so since 1993 with two computers owned over that time span. Each computer has been used for over 7 years before being replaced. I have been following these types of discussions for 15 years. I have never had a hard drive problem. My stats are similar to yours, except that I defrag once every few months. I've also never had a hard drive problem, and there's no noticeable difference in performance after a defrag. And of course I didn't waste a bunch of time defragging. | |
|
| mgbaker
join:2000-05-14
Charlotte, NC
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by bruzzes :I defrag at an average of 10-20 times per week. I have done so since 1993 with two computers owned over that time span. That is so very unnecessary. Really. Especiallly, when using NTFS. | |
|
Bob Anderson
join:2001-05-05
Ottawa, ON | I manually defrag my 80 gig SATA once a week using the native XP defragger and have been doing so for two and a half years. I run SpinRite 6 at level 5 every three months and have never encountered a problem.
-Bob | |
|
|
Rxdoxx
Premium,Mod
join:2000-11-03
Middle River, MD
clubs:
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
Host:
Software
Washington & Balti..
| I've learned to look at what is fragmented and make a decision based on that.
Years ago I used to just see the number/percentage of fragmentation and react to that. Then I made some adjustments.
I began downloading things to a main drive folder, then cut/paste them over to the storage drive. That step essentially defragged the file in the move. So my storage drives almost never need a defrag.
When I look at the fragmentation list (I use PD), most of the time it is Microsoft files that account for most if not all of items. (The Restore files seem always to be a big part).
So I have really slowed down on the number of times I defrag the drive. Maybe every 2 or 3 months, and that is usually because saved games has gotten messy.
Other files that tend to be fragmented are dealt with by using CCleaner, which removes the older AV update packages, and the temporary Java packages.
I may find something like 2000 fragmented files, that after I move things to storage and run CCleaner, the new fragmented files found has dropped to 6 or 700, and since I don't really use or access those files, I don't need to defrag just to make them neat. And my work-units for Folding at home are "self-cleaning" deleted when sent back to Stanford, so I ignore them also.
--
Was a Cruise Fanatic, one cruise on Princess cured me. Bleah | |
|
|
ZZZZZZZ
Premium
join:2001-05-27
PARADISE
| quote:
I defrag at an average of 10-20 times per week.
Thats insane,I defrag once a week,if I think about it.
I use JkDefrag now after having used most of the others over the years,Diskeeper,Vopt,Speed-disk,and find that it does a great job.
--
~~Get our troops home...now!!~~ | |
|
| 
AB
Premium
join:2006-04-04
Leesburg, VA
| Re: [Discussion] Defragging Opinions said by ZZZZZZZ : quote:
I defrag at an average of 10-20 times per week.
Thats insane . . . Yep, agreed.
I like to keep my defragging and bathing on similar schedules-- once every few months, whether I need to or not.
| |
|
acuraman
Outta shape new dad
Premium
join:2001-03-02
Campbell, CA | I also use JkDefrag but I only run it once a month maybe every 2 months depending on my mood.
--
"Motivation is simple. You eliminate those who are not motivated." | |
|
FutureMon
OW My Eyes
Premium,ExMod 2002-05
join:2000-10-05
Colorado Springs, CO
clubs:
| Back in the day of Norton Speed Disk, one of the main reasons to Defrag was because for recoverability purposes, it's better to have your files in contiguous space.
If you had a HDD crash, you could fire up the Norton Disk Editor, go into physical disk mode, check the FAT for the starting cylinder/sector of your important file(s), then copy them off to floppy.
If these files were fragmented all over the place, you'd have to copy them off in multiple seperate passes of sectors-at-a-time, so it made it important to have a defragged drive as often as possible.
I worked for Peter Norton back then and I had to walk some users through this process of grabbing files off their HDD in physical mode, so I made it a point to tell them to defrag as often as possible in the future.
My bro and I had our systems set up so that when we went to shut them down, they'd do a quick defrag before turning off.
Nowadays, the built in XP defrag, doesn't seem to do as good of a job - still leaves stuff fragmented to my chagrin  but I've never evaluated any other optimizers once I moved to 2000/XP.
- FM
--
Undisputed BBR Karaoke Champion! Care to challenge me? | |
|
| MrIcehouse
join:2006-02-07
Saint Petersburg, FL | Re: [Discussion] Defragging Opinions That was back in the day when Peter Norton was in control and the name Norton doesn't equal suck | |
|
| | |
chrisretusn
Retired
Premium
join:2007-08-13
Philippines
| Defragmenting is mostly hype. I rarely defragment my hard drives. When I do, I really see no performance improvement. If I have to use a utility to show the improvement, then whats the point. I do not use that utility everyday. Some folks are obsessed with organizing there files on disk. Some just like to see the neat display of the "fragmentation" and then the nice ordered display of defragmentation. Most computer users really have no need to defragment their hard drives.
Unless you are dealing with huge databases or large files that have continuous changing data the performance, regular fragmentation is not really necessary and you really won't see much of an improvement. While it is somewhat true that recovering a defragmented hard drive will be easier it is not a guarantee. In my experience unless you are willing to pay big bucks to a recovery data expert your data is lost and shame of you for not backing it up.
I have no problem with folks who feel the need, if it makes you feel better go for it. This is just my opinion, based on over 35 years working with computers.
--
Chris
Living in Paradise!! | |
|
|
Confuzzle
join:2007-11-21
California
| hey guys i just got this and uninstalled it after an error when i tried to boot defrag ... (something about my HDD being locked or something?) .. and i decided it was probably due to poor configuration on my part so i read the pdf online and have a couple of questions before reinstalling ... how do i install using the config.ini? the only reason i wanna know is because i had read on perfectdisk something about boot optimization .. i can't remember anymore but it sounded good lol ... and what is the difference between "let perfectdisk manage" and "let perfectdisk manage all layout.ini files" .. like what do they both do? .. i don't understand the description they have for it ... and what is this active directory thing? .. is it really great? lol .. and if so where do i get this? .. im running xp sp2.
thanx for reading through my clutter  | |
|
|
|
|
Re: [Update] PerfectDisk 2008 - Build 52
·
