Diskeeper - is it much faster than MS Defrag on XP ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter zero
  • Start date Start date
It does have the advantage of being able to defrag several disks at the
same time. Works well for me... I have a dual cpu system and 5 drives.
 
[This followup was posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage and a copy
was sent to the cited author.]

Is it worth bothering with ?
Click to expand...

The defrag in Win2K/XP is just a cut-down version of Diskeeper. The 2K
version cannot defrag the pagefile or MFT (Master File Table). I'm not
certain about the XP version. The MS versions cannot be scheduled to run
in the background. Diskeeper has several scheduling options, and separate
adjustable priorities for scheduled (Set-It-And-Forget-It) or manual. For
most home users, just run it once in awhile and it's generally enough. The
full versions are nice for corporate use due to their scheduling.

I've used Diskeeper since NT4, which has no standard defrag, and never
had any issues with it. It's used on all computers at work, too.

There are several others out there, such as GoldenBow VoptXP
(www.goldenbow.com), O&O Defrag (www.oo-software.com), Norton SpeedDisk (I
think only as part of Norton Tools or SystemWorks), and probably others.
Most, including Executive Software's Diskeeper, have 30-day trial versions
you can download and try out.
 
NT question - as it has no defrag (must be NTFS i guess) isnt the
performance dragged
down if it is never defragged - as in the pcs where i work

we had no add on software to do this

thanks



Andrew Rossmann said:
[This followup was posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage and a copy
was sent to the cited author.]

Is it worth bothering with ?
Click to expand...

The defrag in Win2K/XP is just a cut-down version of Diskeeper. The 2K
version cannot defrag the pagefile or MFT (Master File Table). I'm not
certain about the XP version. The MS versions cannot be scheduled to run
in the background. Diskeeper has several scheduling options, and separate
adjustable priorities for scheduled (Set-It-And-Forget-It) or manual. For
most home users, just run it once in awhile and it's generally enough. The
full versions are nice for corporate use due to their scheduling.

I've used Diskeeper since NT4, which has no standard defrag, and never
had any issues with it. It's used on all computers at work, too.

There are several others out there, such as GoldenBow VoptXP
(www.goldenbow.com), O&O Defrag (www.oo-software.com), Norton SpeedDisk (I
think only as part of Norton Tools or SystemWorks), and probably others.
Most, including Executive Software's Diskeeper, have 30-day trial versions
you can download and try out.

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross
Click to expand...
 
Andrew Rossmann typed this:
[This followup was posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage and a copy
was sent to the cited author.]

Is it worth bothering with ?
Click to expand...

The defrag in Win2K/XP is just a cut-down version of Diskeeper. The 2K
version cannot defrag the pagefile or MFT (Master File Table). I'm not
certain about the XP version. The MS versions cannot be scheduled to run
in the background. Diskeeper has several scheduling options, and separate
adjustable priorities for scheduled (Set-It-And-Forget-It) or manual. For
most home users, just run it once in awhile and it's generally enough. The
full versions are nice for corporate use due to their scheduling.

I've used Diskeeper since NT4, which has no standard defrag, and never
had any issues with it. It's used on all computers at work, too.

There are several others out there, such as GoldenBow VoptXP
(www.goldenbow.com), O&O Defrag (www.oo-software.com), Norton SpeedDisk (I
think only as part of Norton Tools or SystemWorks), and probably others.
Most, including Executive Software's Diskeeper, have 30-day trial versions
you can download and try out.
Click to expand...


DO ANY of these have particularly DIFFICULT times with 'IDE RAID'
arrays? I have used a 'custom' install of Norton System works for
years and find that the SPEED disk is pretty nice, BUT a scheduled
defrag of a 3 disk raid array about 5 months ago 'seemed' to kill one
disk (of course it is purely speculation, it could have just died.)
and now I have not run a defrag on that array since then.

I was looking at RAXCO and it seems pretty intense. Good MFT defrag,
so forth. Thoughts on RAID array degragging greatly appreciated.
 
IDE RAID 5 is going to hammer on IDE drives more than they were designed
for, and a lengthy defrag just makes things worse.

Did you have proper cooling? Defrag is one thing I can run to get my Cheetah
hot.
 
Yes, I do have great cooling... three drives in RAID 0 array.
As I mentioned, the darn thing just 'could've' failed, nothing
to do with defrag. But I am leery...
I don't dislike Speed Disk... seems okay... but always looking
for something new. Thanks.

Eric Gisin typed this:
 
pc-dc- said:
DO ANY of these have particularly DIFFICULT times with 'IDE RAID'
arrays? I have used a 'custom' install of Norton System works for
years and find that the SPEED disk is pretty nice, BUT a scheduled
defrag of a 3 disk raid array about 5 months ago 'seemed' to kill one
disk (of course it is purely speculation, it could have just died.)
and now I have not run a defrag on that array since then.

I was looking at RAXCO and it seems pretty intense. Good MFT defrag,
so forth. Thoughts on RAID array degragging greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, all the defraggers use the standard Windows Defrag API
now (Speedisk used to have it's own driver, but stopped doing that due to
possible compatibility problems.) I assume that this makes any drive, RAID
or not, look the same.

Any defrag will stress a drive due to the heavy activity of moving data
around. I would think any drive not overheated or otherwise having
problems shouldn't be affected. I wouldn't use cheap drives in a RAID
anyways.
 
I've been running v7 for about 8 months on a system with 3 ide, 1 usb
and 1 1394 drives and it is truly "set and forget" plus it will defrag
multiple disks simultaneously. Very nice, highly recommended.
 
Andrew Rossmann typed this:
As far as I know, all the defraggers use the standard Windows Defrag API
now (Speedisk used to have it's own driver, but stopped doing that due to
possible compatibility problems.) I assume that this makes any drive, RAID
or not, look the same.

Any defrag will stress a drive due to the heavy activity of moving data
around. I would think any drive not overheated or otherwise having
problems shouldn't be affected. I wouldn't use cheap drives in a RAID
anyways.
Click to expand...

RIGHT you are... of course (tongue in cheek) drives are getting 'cheaper
and cheaper' - these were 30 GB Maxtor 133's, one died. Maxtor had a
replacement back to me very quickly and I 'did' have a good backup. But
found that the backup was missing a few photos... so I'm more careful
now than ever. Thanks.
 
DO ANY of these have particularly DIFFICULT times with 'IDE RAID'
arrays? I have used a 'custom' install of Norton System works for
years and find that the SPEED disk is pretty nice, BUT a scheduled
defrag of a 3 disk raid array about 5 months ago 'seemed' to kill one
disk (of course it is purely speculation, it could have just died.)
and now I have not run a defrag on that array since then.

I was looking at RAXCO and it seems pretty intense. Good MFT defrag,
so forth. Thoughts on RAID array degragging greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

I'm using win2k with PerfectDisk. Works extremely well and is fast on
plain setup ata100. Esp if you set it to consider all your data
partition files the same age ;)

Don't quote me, but I recall seeing a Faq from their website or a
readme file that said perfect disk doesn't care what kind of array
you've got because it's a level above the hardware controller or some
such thing. apparently there's a logical component and a physical
component involved. Check it out.
 
Back
Top