Guest Pepperoni Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please tell me.
Guest glee Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor Have a look here, by MS MVP Ron Badour: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/scandisk.html and http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/defrag.html One simple workaround is to start in Safe Mode, and then run Defrag from there. Here are a couple of little utilities to automate it for you: ScanDefrag http://www.blueorbsoft.com/scandefrag/ or GEODisk http://dundats.mvps.org/Software/Index.htm -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+ http://dts-l.net/ http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please > tell me.
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Clean Boot -- What it is and why you need it" http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i > can > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please > tell me.
Guest Peter Keller Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor Pepperoni wrote: > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please > tell me. Here is an old Vic Ferri trick that I saved. Make sure you know how to edit system.ini when you reboot. If you copy system.ini to your root drive, and put a line in your autoexec.bat file to copy it back it will automate the process.(copy C:\system.ini C:\windows.) Comment out the line after you reboot. >Power Defrag is very popular but all it does is reboot into defrag, instead of explorer.exe, and then after defragging is done, it reboots again and restores explorer.exe. You can do this manually and with out having to reboot (a little trick I came up with) to start defrag as the only process running. Here's how: 1. Open system.ini or just use msconfig.exe to change the shell=explorer.exe line to shell=defrag.exe The line is under the [boot] section. 2.Press Ctrl+Alt+Del, highlight Explorer and click End Task 3. Click NO when the Shut down screen comes up. 4. Now click End Task again And that will do it as a subsitute to rebooting - defrag.exe will now come up - the same way Power Defrag brings it on after a reboot(no more explorer) Then defrag your disk and reboot into DOS and use the instructions I gave at the top to restore the shell= line back to shell=explorer.exe.
Guest Lee Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor On Feb 9, 7:12 pm, Peter Keller <petekel...@comcast.net> wrote: > Pepperoni wrote: > > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can > > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please > > tell me. > > Here is an old Vic Ferri trick that I saved. Make sure you know how to > edit system.ini when you reboot. If you copy system.ini to your root drive, > and put a line in your autoexec.bat file to copy it back it will > automate the > process.(copy C:\system.ini C:\windows.) Comment out the line after you > reboot. > > >Power Defrag is very popular but all it does is reboot into defrag, > instead of explorer.exe, and then after defragging is done, it reboots > again and > restores explorer.exe. > > You can do this manually and with out having to reboot (a little trick I > came up with) to start defrag as the only process running. Here's how: > > 1. Open system.ini or just use msconfig.exe to change the shell=explorer..exe > line to shell=defrag.exe The line is under the [boot] section. > > 2.Press Ctrl+Alt+Del, highlight Explorer and click End Task > > 3. Click NO when the Shut down screen comes up. > > 4. Now click End Task again > > And that will do it as a subsitute to rebooting - defrag.exe will now > come up - the same way Power Defrag brings it on after a reboot(no more > explorer) > > Then defrag your disk and reboot into DOS and use the instructions I > gave at the top > to restore the shell= line back to shell=explorer.exe. Peter, this a better trick in that only one reboot is need and it forces defrag to run before the system tray has loaded so no normal overhead gets in the way. Give it a try. REGEDIT4 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce] "Scandisk"="Scandskw /a /n" "Defrag"="Defrag /All /Detailed /Noprompt" Make the above into a .reg file and merge it - then reboot. Scandisk will run first and then Defrag, all drives get both treatments and then Windows finishes loading and nothing further needs to be done. The entry above merged into the registry is automatically erased after the processes pointed to have run - once and thus the name. more info on .reg files if needed, http://www.winguides.com/registry/ Pepperoni - the defrag from Windows ME runs several times faster than 98's version and it runs just fine on both 98 and 95. It is on the web if you will just look for it.
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 11, 2008 Posted February 11, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i > can > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please > tell me. Defragging is a waste of time.
Guest Peter Keller Posted February 11, 2008 Posted February 11, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor Lord Turkey Cough wrote: > "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i >> can >> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please >> tell me. > > Defragging is a waste of time. > > You've got a point My Lord. The only time I defrag is before creating an image of my root partition. Clean out the junk and make everything 'contiguous'.
Guest Peter Keller Posted February 11, 2008 Posted February 11, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor Lee wrote: > On Feb 9, 7:12 pm, Peter Keller <petekel...@comcast.net> wrote: >> Pepperoni wrote: >>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can >>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please >>> tell me. >> Here is an old Vic Ferri trick that I saved. Make sure you know how to >> edit system.ini when you reboot. If you copy system.ini to your root drive, >> and put a line in your autoexec.bat file to copy it back it will >> automate the >> process.(copy C:\system.ini C:\windows.) Comment out the line after you >> reboot. >> >> >Power Defrag is very popular but all it does is reboot into defrag, >> instead of explorer.exe, and then after defragging is done, it reboots >> again and >> restores explorer.exe. >> >> You can do this manually and with out having to reboot (a little trick I >> came up with) to start defrag as the only process running. Here's how: >> >> 1. Open system.ini or just use msconfig.exe to change the shell=explorer.exe >> line to shell=defrag.exe The line is under the [boot] section. >> >> 2.Press Ctrl+Alt+Del, highlight Explorer and click End Task >> >> 3. Click NO when the Shut down screen comes up. >> >> 4. Now click End Task again >> >> And that will do it as a subsitute to rebooting - defrag.exe will now >> come up - the same way Power Defrag brings it on after a reboot(no more >> explorer) >> >> Then defrag your disk and reboot into DOS and use the instructions I >> gave at the top >> to restore the shell= line back to shell=explorer.exe. > > Peter, this a better trick in that only one reboot is need and it > forces defrag to run before the system tray has loaded so no normal > overhead gets in the way. Give it a try. > > REGEDIT4 > > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce] > "Scandisk"="Scandskw /a /n" > "Defrag"="Defrag /All /Detailed /Noprompt" > > Make the above into a .reg file and merge it - then reboot. Scandisk > will run first and then Defrag, all drives get both treatments and > then Windows finishes loading and nothing further needs to be done. > The entry above merged into the registry is automatically erased after > the processes pointed to have run - once and thus the name. > Actually I've added a few wrinkles to Vic Ferri's trick that automates the entire process. I'll give your method a try and compare. Thanks. > more info on .reg files if needed, > http://www.winguides.com/registry/ > > Pepperoni - the defrag from Windows ME runs several times faster than > 98's version and it runs just fine on both 98 and 95. It is on the > web if you will just look for it.
Guest Ron Martell Posted February 11, 2008 Posted February 11, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: > >"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i >> can >> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please >> tell me. > >Defragging is a waste of time. > Balderdash. Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2008) On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca "Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference has never been in bed with a mosquito."
Guest none Posted February 12, 2008 Posted February 12, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor After that response, I know why you are called turkey! Ron IS correct! ___ "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message news:rYZrj.9104$zg.8159@newsfe5-win.ntli.net... > > "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... > > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i > > can > > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please > > tell me. > > Defragging is a waste of time. > >
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor The correct form of address is "Sir". "none" <nospam@bogusaddress.com> wrote in message news:eI9jshabIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > After that response, I know why you are called turkey! > Ron IS correct! > ___ > "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message > news:rYZrj.9104$zg.8159@newsfe5-win.ntli.net... >> >> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >> > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried > everything i >> > can >> > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer > please >> > tell me. >> >> Defragging is a waste of time. >> >> > >
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... > "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: > >> >>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything >>> i >>> can >>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>> please >>> tell me. >> >>Defragging is a waste of time. >> > > > Balderdash. > > Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly > fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I > encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file > size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments > and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple > defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They > now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. I don't believe that for a minute. Defragging actually slows a computer down. Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely, lost your entire database , yum yum. > > Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada > -- > Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2008) > On-Line Help Computer Service > http://onlinehelp.bc.ca > > "Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference > has never been in bed with a mosquito."
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... > > "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything >>>> i >>>> can >>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>> please >>>> tell me. >>> >>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>> >> >> >> Balderdash. >> >> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. > > I don't believe that for a minute. > Defragging actually slows a computer down. Balderdash. > Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be > slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. > Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely, > lost your entire database , yum yum. Got any references there? Actual tests? -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message > news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >> >> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>> everything i >>>>> can >>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>> please >>>>> tell me. >>>> >>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Balderdash. >>> >>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >> >> I don't believe that for a minute. >> Defragging actually slows a computer down. > > Balderdash. > >> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. > > You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. > >> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely, >> lost your entire database , yum yum. > > Got any references there? Actual tests? Wears out your hard drive. I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting it to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat mine with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing don't get time to cool down and fail. > > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > >
Guest Bill in Co. Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor Lord Turkey Cough wrote: > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> >> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>> >>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>> everything i can >>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>> please tell me. >>>>> >>>>> Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Balderdash. >>>> >>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>> >>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >> >> Balderdash. >> >>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >> >> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >> >>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely, >>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >> >> Got any references there? Actual tests? > > Wears out your hard drive. > I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? Not really. > It's a bit like driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting > it > to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices > and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat > mine > with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing > don't get time to cool down and fail. > >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:Oo%23B3fpbIHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Lord Turkey Cough wrote: >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>>> >>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>>> everything i can >>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>>> please tell me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Balderdash. >>>>> >>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>>> >>>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >>> >>> Balderdash. >>> >>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >>> >>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >>> >>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how >>>> lovely, >>>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >>> >>> Got any references there? Actual tests? >> >> Wears out your hard drive. >> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? > > Not really. Well maybe not in cloud-cuckoo land but in the real world the laws of physics kick in, unfortunately, > >> It's a bit like driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting >> it >> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices >> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat >> mine >> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing >> don't get time to cool down and fail. >> >>> >>> -- >>> Gary S. Terhune >>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>> http://www.grystmill.com > >
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so. I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no wish to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert comes along and gives you a good discussion. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... > > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> >> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>> >>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>> everything i >>>>>> can >>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>> please >>>>>> tell me. >>>>> >>>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Balderdash. >>>> >>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>> >>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >> >> Balderdash. >> >>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >> >> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >> >>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely, >>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >> >> Got any references there? Actual tests? > > Wears out your hard drive. > I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? > It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting > it > to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices > and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat > mine > with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing > don't > get time to cool down and fail. > >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> > >
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so. > > I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no wish > to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert comes > along and gives you a good discussion. > I am 'expert' enough thank you. OK real data for you. 1. I have defragged before and I took the time to make a a note of the time taken for certain operations, boot up etc.... Result no noticable difference, infact it even took longer to boot up, there was no performance benefit whatsoever. *Infact* if anything my machine was slower. So there is one piece of real data. 2. Goto step 1. Quite remarkable, you won't find any facts or figure for the performance increase from a defrag from the sellers of defrag software. I did not one produce had a * after performance increase, eg performance increase* *performance increase may be unpredictable. Which is a nice way of covering it from being sued when it makes no difference or infact gets worse, I assume the 'unpredictability range' includes negative increases. http://www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2F2007%2Fs1807%2F19s07%2F19s07.asp "However, a recent study by Diskeeper Corporation (http://www.diskeeper.com) found that a brand-new computer with a fresh installation of WinXP can boot about 27% faster after running a basic disk defragmentation." Hmmm...an 'independant' study by a company selling defrag software!! And what an interesting study it is, because a brand new computer will of course be already defragged in the first place!! Anyway defragging is a waste of time, I know that from experience as I have done it a few times myself on a different machine, performance is either worse or it makes no difference. And it's a big let down when you find you wasted all that time for no effect, it will seem slower even if it is the same because the performance increase you expected won't be there. Of course you computer will tend to get slower over time but that is generally because you have more stuff installed on it, and the only way to cure that is to uninstall it. So....it ain't broke so I ain't fixing it :O) > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > > "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message > news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... >> >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>>> >>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>>> everything i >>>>>>> can >>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>>> please >>>>>>> tell me. >>>>>> >>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Balderdash. >>>>> >>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>>> >>>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >>> >>> Balderdash. >>> >>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >>> >>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >>> >>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how >>>> lovely, >>>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >>> >>> Got any references there? Actual tests? >> >> Wears out your hard drive. >> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? >> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting >> it >> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices >> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat >> mine >> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing >> don't >> get time to cool down and fail. >> >>> >>> -- >>> Gary S. Terhune >>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>> http://www.grystmill.com >>> >>> >> >> >
Guest glee Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor How effective defragmentation will be for a home user depends in part on how full the hard drive is, and what type of file creation and usage occurs on a particular system. Programs that create or modify files and databases intensively will create fragmentation more quickly, and those systems will benefit most from defragmentation. Heavy use of programs such as Outlook Express (or any other newsreader or mail client) is but one example. For those readers here who want to understand the effects of fragmentation, these links may prove educational: The Adverse Effects of File Fragmentation on Video Editing http://www.raxco.co.uk/file.asp?FileID=509 Identifying Common Reliability/Stability Problems Caused by File Fragmentation http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/Stability_WhitePaper.pdf The Effects of Age and Fragmentation on File System Performance http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~keith/research/tr94.html There are plenty of other studies that have been done both by makers of defragmentation products and by independent researchers, over the past decade or two, if anyone cares to search them out. The "expert" analysis of Turkey Cough is in fact not an analysis at all, but rather anecdotal reporting with no scientifically controlled data for comparison ("my computer didn't FEEL like it was faster after defragmenting"....very scientific). The one partially true statement made by Turkey Cough is that defragmentation can shorten hard drive life.....but ONLY if it is done excessively, and by that I mean on a daily basis. Also, defragmentation should not be done on a drive that is not healthy.....IOW one that does not pass at least the rudimentary checks done by standard scandisk, or that does not pass a diagnostic by the hard drive maker's disk diagnostic utility, or that fails a S.M.A.R.T. test. -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+ http://dts-l.net/ http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so. > > I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no wish to > engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert comes along and gives > you a good discussion. > > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > > "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message > news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... >> >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>>> >>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i >>>>>>> can >>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please >>>>>>> tell me. >>>>>> >>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Balderdash. >>>>> >>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>>> >>>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >>> >>> Balderdash. >>> >>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >>> >>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >>> >>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely, >>>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >>> >>> Got any references there? Actual tests? >> >> Wears out your hard drive. >> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? >> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting it >> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices >> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat mine >> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing don't >> get time to cool down and fail. >> >>> >>> -- >>> Gary S. Terhune >>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>> http://www.grystmill.com >>> >>> >> >> >
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor Thank you very much, kind sir. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message news:%23bhKVXsbIHA.5768@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > How effective defragmentation will be for a home user depends in part on > how full the hard drive is, and what type of file creation and usage > occurs on a particular system. Programs that create or modify files and > databases intensively will create fragmentation more quickly, and those > systems will benefit most from defragmentation. Heavy use of programs > such as Outlook Express (or any other newsreader or mail client) is but > one example. > > For those readers here who want to understand the effects of > fragmentation, these links may prove educational: > > The Adverse Effects of File Fragmentation on Video Editing > http://www.raxco.co.uk/file.asp?FileID=509 > > Identifying Common Reliability/Stability Problems Caused by File > Fragmentation > http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/Stability_WhitePaper.pdf > > The Effects of Age and Fragmentation on File System Performance > http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~keith/research/tr94.html > > There are plenty of other studies that have been done both by makers of > defragmentation products and by independent researchers, over the past > decade or two, if anyone cares to search them out. > > The "expert" analysis of Turkey Cough is in fact not an analysis at all, > but rather anecdotal reporting with no scientifically controlled data for > comparison ("my computer didn't FEEL like it was faster after > defragmenting"....very scientific). > > The one partially true statement made by Turkey Cough is that > defragmentation can shorten hard drive life.....but ONLY if it is done > excessively, and by that I mean on a daily basis. Also, defragmentation > should not be done on a drive that is not healthy.....IOW one that does > not pass at least the rudimentary checks done by standard scandisk, or > that does not pass a diagnostic by the hard drive maker's disk diagnostic > utility, or that fails a S.M.A.R.T. test. > -- > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+ > http://dts-l.net/ > http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm > > > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so. >> >> I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no >> wish to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert >> comes along and gives you a good discussion. >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >> news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... >>> >>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>> >>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>>>> >>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>>>> everything i >>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>> tell me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Balderdash. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>>>> >>>>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >>>> >>>> Balderdash. >>>> >>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >>>> >>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >>>> >>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how >>>>> lovely, >>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >>>> >>>> Got any references there? Actual tests? >>> >>> Wears out your hard drive. >>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? >>> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and >>> expecting it >>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices >>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat >>> mine >>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The >>> bearing don't >>> get time to cool down and fail. >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gary S. Terhune >>>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>>> http://www.grystmill.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor What you rely upon is called "anecdotal" evidence. I have lots of that stuff regarding Defrag, and it all contradicts yours. Particularly older systems with small drives, regular defragging almost always produces marked improvement in performance. (If the machine isn't being used much, defrag obviously won't help *much*, but then maintenance can be scheduled much less frequently.) Only if the drive is already sketchy and if defrag is run WAY TOO MUCH (daily), is there any risk of damage. The amount of work you put the drive through is balanced by reducing the amount of excessive thrashing that occurs on a fragmented disk. My recommendation has always been to schedule maintenance once a month for a well-used personal machine, less often for a lightly used machine, but much more often for a heavy working machine, especially one that has constantly used databases. How often becomes a question of how much you want the machine down for maintenance. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message news:%VNsj.91$Ef1.63@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... > > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so. >> >> I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no >> wish to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert >> comes along and gives you a good discussion. >> > > I am 'expert' enough thank you. > > OK real data for you. > > 1. I have defragged before and I took the time to make a > a note of the time taken for certain operations, boot up > etc.... Result no noticable difference, infact it even took longer > to boot up, there was no performance benefit whatsoever. > *Infact* if anything my machine was slower. > > So there is one piece of real data. > > 2. Goto step 1. > > Quite remarkable, you won't find any facts or figure for the performance > increase from a defrag from the sellers of defrag software. > I did not one produce had a * after performance increase, eg > performance increase* > > *performance increase may be unpredictable. > > Which is a nice way of covering it from being sued when it makes no > difference > or infact gets worse, I assume the 'unpredictability range' includes > negative increases. > > http://www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2F2007%2Fs1807%2F19s07%2F19s07.asp > "However, a recent study by Diskeeper Corporation (http://www.diskeeper.com) > found that a brand-new computer with a fresh installation of WinXP can > boot about 27% faster after running a basic disk defragmentation." > > Hmmm...an 'independant' study by a company selling defrag software!! > > And what an interesting study it is, because a brand new computer will of > course > be already defragged in the first place!! > > Anyway defragging is a waste of time, I know that from experience as I > have done > it a few times myself on a different machine, performance is either worse > or it makes > no difference. And it's a big let down when you find you wasted all that > time for no effect, > it will seem slower even if it is the same because the performance > increase you expected > won't be there. > Of course you computer will tend to get slower over time but that is > generally because > you have more stuff installed on it, and the only way to cure that is to > uninstall it. > > So....it ain't broke so I ain't fixing it :O) > > > > > >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >> news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... >>> >>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>> >>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>>>> >>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>>>> everything i >>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>> tell me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Balderdash. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>>>> >>>>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >>>> >>>> Balderdash. >>>> >>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >>>> >>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >>>> >>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how >>>>> lovely, >>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >>>> >>>> Got any references there? Actual tests? >>> >>> Wears out your hard drive. >>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? >>> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and >>> expecting it >>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices >>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat >>> mine >>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The >>> bearing don't >>> get time to cool down and fail. >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gary S. Terhune >>>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>>> http://www.grystmill.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
Guest Tilly821 Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor The expert Lord Turkey is correct. Here is a true independent whitepaper: http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/IDC_Defrag_WhitePaper_2003.pdf Conducted by IDC (International Data Corporation) and sponsered by American Business Research Corporation. Both are reputable companies. (Its about Diskeeper, so of course they would want to include it on their site. Also, as a tech journalist (and because I'm a nerd), I have conducted a few tests of my own. Its is true, you can see significant improvements with defragmentation, especially with a third-party utility. However, it may be true you have not seen these imrpovements if you do not use your computer regularly (therefore there would not be as much fragmentation to restore), or store and edit large files. You also may have not seen these improvements on a computer with other issues or damage. Defragging will maintain your computer's health, speed and reliability. The reason I suggest a third party, is because they are light years quicker (compared to the built-in) and they do not interfere with your work (meaning you don't have to log off to defrag). With this maintence you should not have to upgrade your hardware as often. I don't know if this will change your mind, but (if you try it) I hope it saves you some money in the long run. -- Tilly821 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tilly821's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/member.php?userid=39315 View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/showthread.php?t=912810 http://forums.techarena.in
Guest Bill in Co. Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor You meant incorrect. Tilly821 wrote: > The expert Lord Turkey is correct. > > Here is a true independent whitepaper: > http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/IDC_Defrag_WhitePaper_2003.pdf > Conducted by IDC (International Data Corporation) and sponsered by > American Business Research Corporation. Both are reputable companies. > (Its about Diskeeper, so of course they would want to include it on > their site. > > Also, as a tech journalist (and because I'm a nerd), I have conducted a > few tests of my own. Its is true, you can see significant improvements > with defragmentation, especially with a third-party utility. > > However, it may be true you have not seen these imrpovements if you do > not use your computer regularly (therefore there would not be as much > fragmentation to restore), or store and edit large files. You also may > have not seen these improvements on a computer with other issues or > damage. > > Defragging will maintain your computer's health, speed and reliability. > The reason I suggest a third party, is because they are light years > quicker (compared to the built-in) and they do not interfere with your > work (meaning you don't have to log off to defrag). > > With this maintence you should not have to upgrade your hardware as > often. > I don't know if this will change your mind, but (if you try it) I hope > it saves you some money in the long run. > > > -- > Tilly821 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Tilly821's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/member.php?userid=39315 > View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/showthread.php?t=912810 > > http://forums.techarena.in
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message news:%23rFbzOzbIHA.4344@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > What you rely upon is called "anecdotal" evidence. I have lots of that > stuff regarding Defrag, Yes so much you are unable to produce any as evidence. >and it all contradicts yours. Particularly older systems with small drives, >regular defragging almost always produces marked improvement in >performance. (If the machine isn't being used much, defrag obviously won't >help *much*, but then maintenance can be scheduled much less frequently.) >Only if the drive is already sketchy and if defrag is run WAY TOO MUCH >(daily), is there any risk of damage. The amount of work you put the drive >through is balanced by reducing the amount of excessive thrashing that >occurs on a fragmented disk. > > My recommendation has always been to schedule maintenance once a month for > a well-used personal machine, less often for a lightly used machine, but > much more often for a heavy working machine, especially one that has > constantly used databases. How often becomes a question of how much you > want the machine down for maintenance. > > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > > "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message > news:%VNsj.91$Ef1.63@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... >> >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >> news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so. >>> >>> I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no >>> wish to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert >>> comes along and gives you a good discussion. >>> >> >> I am 'expert' enough thank you. >> >> OK real data for you. >> >> 1. I have defragged before and I took the time to make a >> a note of the time taken for certain operations, boot up >> etc.... Result no noticable difference, infact it even took longer >> to boot up, there was no performance benefit whatsoever. >> *Infact* if anything my machine was slower. >> >> So there is one piece of real data. >> >> 2. Goto step 1. >> >> Quite remarkable, you won't find any facts or figure for the performance >> increase from a defrag from the sellers of defrag software. >> I did not one produce had a * after performance increase, eg >> performance increase* >> >> *performance increase may be unpredictable. >> >> Which is a nice way of covering it from being sued when it makes no >> difference >> or infact gets worse, I assume the 'unpredictability range' includes >> negative increases. >> >> http://www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2F2007%2Fs1807%2F19s07%2F19s07.asp >> "However, a recent study by Diskeeper Corporation (http://www.diskeeper.com) >> found that a brand-new computer with a fresh installation of WinXP can >> boot about 27% faster after running a basic disk defragmentation." >> >> Hmmm...an 'independant' study by a company selling defrag software!! >> >> And what an interesting study it is, because a brand new computer will of >> course >> be already defragged in the first place!! >> >> Anyway defragging is a waste of time, I know that from experience as I >> have done >> it a few times myself on a different machine, performance is either worse >> or it makes >> no difference. And it's a big let down when you find you wasted all that >> time for no effect, >> it will seem slower even if it is the same because the performance >> increase you expected >> won't be there. >> Of course you computer will tend to get slower over time but that is >> generally because >> you have more stuff installed on it, and the only way to cure that is to >> uninstall it. >> >> So....it ain't broke so I ain't fixing it :O) >> >> >> >> >> >>> -- >>> Gary S. Terhune >>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>> http://www.grystmill.com >>> >>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>> news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... >>>> >>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >>>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>> >>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>>>>> everything i >>>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>>> tell me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Balderdash. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >>>>> >>>>> Balderdash. >>>>> >>>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >>>>> >>>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >>>>> >>>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how >>>>>> lovely, >>>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >>>>> >>>>> Got any references there? Actual tests? >>>> >>>> Wears out your hard drive. >>>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? >>>> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and >>>> expecting it >>>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices >>>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat >>>> mine >>>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The >>>> bearing don't >>>> get time to cool down and fail. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Gary S. Terhune >>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >
Guest Lord Turkey Cough Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Re: disk defragmentor "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message news:%23bhKVXsbIHA.5768@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > How effective defragmentation will be for a home user depends in part on > how full the hard drive is, and what type of file creation and usage > occurs on a particular system. Programs that create or modify files and > databases intensively will create fragmentation more quickly, and those > systems will benefit most from defragmentation. Heavy use of programs > such as Outlook Express (or any other newsreader or mail client) is but > one example. > > For those readers here who want to understand the effects of > fragmentation, these links may prove educational: > > The Adverse Effects of File Fragmentation on Video Editing > http://www.raxco.co.uk/file.asp?FileID=509 Please understand that the above is merely work of the sales/marketing department of a disk defragmenter software retailer. > > Identifying Common Reliability/Stability Problems Caused by File > Fragmentation > http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/Stability_WhitePaper.pdf Please understand that the above is merely work of the sales/marketing department of a disk defragmenter software retailer. Infact the one which claims that is can improve the performance of an already defragmented system (brand new system) by 27% IIRC. Thats pure bullsh*t of course and no doubt the rest of their stuff is the same. > > The Effects of Age and Fragmentation on File System Performance > http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~keith/research/tr94.html Largly a load of rubbish some of that stuff is over 20 years old, pre-internet efectively. > > There are plenty of other studies that have been done both by makers of > defragmentation products and by independent researchers, over the past > decade or two, if anyone cares to search them out. > > The "expert" analysis of Turkey Cough is in fact not an analysis at all, > but rather anecdotal reporting with no scientifically controlled data for > comparison ("my computer didn't FEEL like it was faster after > defragmenting"....very scientific). It didn't feel any faster because it was not any faster I timed the boot up time and it infact took longer after defragging. FACT not anecdote. However if you want to waste you time and mone defraging it is no skin off my nose. > > The one partially true statement made by Turkey Cough is that > defragmentation can shorten hard drive life.....but ONLY if it is done > excessively, and by that I mean on a daily basis. Also, defragmentation > should not be done on a drive that is not healthy.....IOW one that does > not pass at least the rudimentary checks done by standard scandisk, or > that does not pass a diagnostic by the hard drive maker's disk diagnostic > utility, or that fails a S.M.A.R.T. test. > -- > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+ > http://dts-l.net/ > http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm > > > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so. >> >> I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no >> wish to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert >> comes along and gives you a good discussion. >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >> news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net... >>> >>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>> >>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message >>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net... >>>>> >>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com... >>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com... >>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried >>>>>>>> everything i >>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer >>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>> tell me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Balderdash. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly >>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I >>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file >>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments >>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple >>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They >>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly. >>>>> >>>>> I don't believe that for a minute. >>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down. >>>> >>>> Balderdash. >>>> >>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be >>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag. >>>> >>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there. >>>> >>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how >>>>> lovely, >>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum. >>>> >>>> Got any references there? Actual tests? >>> >>> Wears out your hard drive. >>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it? >>> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and >>> expecting it >>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices >>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat >>> mine >>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The >>> bearing don't >>> get time to cool down and fail. >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gary S. Terhune >>>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>>> http://www.grystmill.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
Recommended Posts