How often to defragment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter beevale
  • Start date Start date
B

beevale

How often should the defragmenting tool be used - whenever I have analysed
the possibilities of using it I am advised that I do not need to defragment
this volume - yet I have also read it is good policy to defragment system
frequently.
 
beevale said:
How often should the defragmenting tool be used - whenever I have
analysed the possibilities of using it I am advised that I do not
need to defragment this volume - yet I have also read it is good
policy to defragment system frequently.
Click to expand...

Because XP is a much better file manager than the 9x versions, particularly
if using NTFS, you do not need to defrag anything like as much as before.
depending on what sort of files you use on a regular basis and how
frequently, once a month could well be sufficient.
 
Defragging is dependent on how much writing to and deleting from the hard
drive you do. If you don't do much of this, you could go months without
defragging.
 
beevale said:
How often should the defragmenting tool be used - whenever I have
analysed the possibilities of using it I am advised that I do not
need to defragment this volume - yet I have also read it is good
policy to defragment system frequently.
Click to expand...

My hard drives are all NTFS, so I defrag every year or two.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM
Please respond in Newsgroup. Do not send email
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Protect your PC
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/
 
beevale said:
How often should the defragmenting tool be used - whenever I
have analysed the possibilities of using it I am advised that I
do not need to defragment this volume - yet I have also read it
is good policy to defragment system frequently.
Click to expand...
It really depends on a lot of things, such as how many files you
copy, move, delete, edit, save, download, etc., and some of your
applications.
So, it varies over time, with what you did with the computer
lately and how many times you did it. Etc. It's different for
everyone, really.

Two things to keep in mind:
-- It hurts nothing to defrag if it's not yet 'required'.
-- The more fragmented a drive is, the longer it takes to
defrag. I recently managed to let my backup drive become 75%
fragmented, and it took quite ahwile to defragment it. Had I
kept up with it, it would have been much faster, as in minutes
instead of hours, to defrag it.
-- For XP's defrag to run, it requires 15% or more of unused
drive space or it will most likely fail to defrag properly.
You'll get a message about the space problem if it's under 15%
and it'll allow you to try, but in my experience it's a VERY slow
process and has to be repeated more than twice to defrag
everything properly. So, keeping an eye on available disk space
is also a good idea.

Often I'll run a Defrag at the end of the day, just as I'm
quitting, and let it run unattended.
I don't use XP's defrag though there is absolutely nothing
wrong with it; I use Norton's Speedisk, plus use Norton's System
Monitor running in hidden mode to give me an alert if disk space
should fall below 15% or fragementation reaches 20%. At the end
of each day I glance at it, and if anything's counting up very
far, I run the defrag when I'm done working at the computer.
IMO it's a good habit.
BTW, XP's defrag is a subset of Norton's defrag; just more
limited in bells & whistles, otherwise perfectly good.

HTH,

Pop
 
"XP's defrag is a subset of Norton's defrag"

XP's built-in defragmenter is NOT a subset of SpeedDisk. While they share
the same limitations, XP's is based off of old Diskeeper (formerly Executive
Software) code that Microsoft originally licensed for use in Windows 2000.

- Greg/Raxco Software
Microsoft MVP - Windows File System

Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a
commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.

Want to email me? Delete ntloader.
 
However defrag and scandisk on 9x and Dos 6.n were based on Norton's.

Defrag [Drive] /All /F /U /Q /P /Concise /Detailed /Noprompt /Pmioctl /Sageset:x /SageRun:x /Mwmem /Task:x

<nothing> Starts a UI to defragment drives
Drive Drive to defrag
/All Defragment all local, non-removable drives.
/F Defragment files and free space.
/U Defragment files only.
/Q Defragment free space only.
/P System and hidden files will be optimized. Be very careful. Reboot after use. Dangerous on drives that hold drive space container files
/Concise Display the Hide Details view (Default).
/Detailed Display the Show Details view.
/Noprompt Unattended mode; do not stop and display confirmation messages.
/Pmioctl Turns off use of the protected-mode IOCTL from Drvspacx.vxd.
/sageset:x Display the System Agent-Aware Setting dialog box and store the settings in the SETx registry key.
/Sagerun:x Runs in unattended mode using the System Agent-aware settings in the SETx registry key.
/MWMEM
/TASK:x
Defrag supports the command line options from Dos 6.22, however they appear not to do anything. Some of them are from Norton's Utilities and didn't do anything in Dos 6.22 either.
/B
/SN Old sort by Name
/SE Old sort by Extension
/SD Old sort by Date
/SS Old sort by Size
/H Defrag hidden files
/NOIO
/RESCAN
/CVF
/NCD
/DT
HELP, SKIPHIGH, NOALTKEY
BW, LCD, HERC, NOZOOM, G0, G1, G2 Old display and mouse options
MULTITASK
 
Yes my hard drives are NTFS so thanks for your advice everyone!
Click to expand...

It would be based on how much data you add/remove/import/etc...

The more you fragment files the slower they perform when accessed. If
you do a lot of work with files on a large drive the files don't
fragment as badly as they do on a smaller drive - so, it really depends
on your personal use.

I use Diskeeper on all my systems, love it, and it always makes a very
noticeable improvement in disk performance when installed on a machine
that's been used for months without any disk maintenance. I run it once
a month on average.
 
Microsoft suggests:

Tips for Using the Disk Defragmentation Tools

For best results when defragmenting volumes, follow these tips:

• Before defragmenting a volume, delete any unnecessary files, such as
temporary files. You can delete unnecessary files by using Disk Cleanup.
For more information about Disk Cleanup, see Windows XP Professional Help.

• Defragment a volume before you add a large number of files to the
volume, such as before you install programs. This ensures that the files
occupy contiguous space and do not become fragmented after you add them.

• Defragment a volume after you delete a large number of files from the
volume.

• Defragment a volume after you install programs on it.

• Defragment the system and boot volumes after installing Windows XP
Professional.

• Defragment volumes during periods of low system activity.

and:

The following files are permanently excluded from being defragmented.

• Bootsect.dos
• Safeboot.fs
• Safeboot.csv
• Safeboot.rsv
• Hiberfil.sys
• Memory.dmp
• Paging file

John
 
PopS escreveu:
It really depends on a lot of things, such as how many files you
copy, move, delete, edit, save, download, etc., and some of your
applications.
So, it varies over time, with what you did with the computer
lately and how many times you did it. Etc. It's different for
everyone, really.

Two things to keep in mind:
-- It hurts nothing to defrag if it's not yet 'required'.
Click to expand...

Hi PopS

I'm interested in your comment that "It hurts nothing to defrag".
I recently received the following advice in another group (serious
thread, competent people) which strongly suggests that frequent, and
particularly unnecessary, defragging should be avoided:

"If you don't have ECC memory frequent defragging can be very
harmful. Each file move passes through a memory buffer, and there
is NO check for dropped or altered bits in that buffer. So you can
be gradually destroying your files with no warning. "

Do you, or anybody else, believe that this factor really does need to
be considered for those of us without ECC RAM?

TIA
Paul
 
"If you don't have ECC memory frequent defragging can be very
harmful. Each file move passes through a memory buffer, and there
is NO check for dropped or altered bits in that buffer. So you can
be gradually destroying your files with no warning. "

Do you, or anybody else, believe that this factor really does need to
be considered for those of us without ECC RAM?
Click to expand...

I've been using computers since the 70's, and as soon as defragging
became available it was used, on most platforms. I have servers that run
24/7/365 that defrag every night on schedule, ones that defrag for
several hours doing as many defrags during that period as possible,
etc... I've never experienced data loss during/because of a defrag, even
during a unplanned restart of the system during a defrag.
 
'Leythos' wrote:
| I've been using computers since the 70's, and as soon as defragging
| became available it was used, on most platforms. I have servers that run
| 24/7/365 that defrag every night on schedule, ones that defrag for
| several hours doing as many defrags during that period as possible,
| etc... I've never experienced data loss during/because of a defrag, even
| during a unplanned restart of the system during a defrag.
_____

Because the defragger reads a cluster, rewrites in a new location, then
checks the original against the copy before releasing the original cluster
to be used.

Phil Weldon

| In article <[email protected]>,
| (e-mail address removed) says...
| > "If you don't have ECC memory frequent defragging can be very
| > harmful. Each file move passes through a memory buffer, and there
| > is NO check for dropped or altered bits in that buffer. So you can
| > be gradually destroying your files with no warning. "
| >
| > Do you, or anybody else, believe that this factor really does need to
| > be considered for those of us without ECC RAM?
|
| I've been using computers since the 70's, and as soon as defragging
| became available it was used, on most platforms. I have servers that run
| 24/7/365 that defrag every night on schedule, ones that defrag for
| several hours doing as many defrags during that period as possible,
| etc... I've never experienced data loss during/because of a defrag, even
| during a unplanned restart of the system during a defrag.
|
|
|
| --
|
| (e-mail address removed)
| remove 999 in order to email me
 
'Leythos' wrote:
| I've been using computers since the 70's, and as soon as defragging
| became available it was used, on most platforms. I have servers that run
| 24/7/365 that defrag every night on schedule, ones that defrag for
| several hours doing as many defrags during that period as possible,
| etc... I've never experienced data loss during/because of a defrag, even
| during a unplanned restart of the system during a defrag.
_____

Because the defragger reads a cluster, rewrites in a new location, then
checks the original against the copy before releasing the original cluster
to be used.
Click to expand...

Yep, but I thought it was important to show the OP that many years of
doing a defrag have not resulted in any data loss on hundreds of servers
and thousands of workstations.
 
Phil Weldon escreveu:
'Leythos' wrote:
| I've been using computers since the 70's, and as soon as defragging
| became available it was used, on most platforms. I have servers that run
| 24/7/365 that defrag every night on schedule, ones that defrag for
| several hours doing as many defrags during that period as possible,
| etc... I've never experienced data loss during/because of a defrag, even
| during a unplanned restart of the system during a defrag.
_____

Because the defragger reads a cluster, rewrites in a new location, then
checks the original against the copy before releasing the original cluster
to be used.
Click to expand...

Hi Phil
Does this mean that ALL defraggers do include some type of
error-checking and not just those incorporated on machines with ECC
RAM?
In this case my advisors remarks regarding the necessity to ensure the
computer has ECC RAM are invalid (when frequent defragging is intended
or necessary)?

TIA
Paul
 
beevale said:
How often should the defragmenting tool be used - whenever I have
analysed
the possibilities of using it I am advised that I do not need to
defragment
this volume - yet I have also read it is good policy to defragment
system
frequently.
Click to expand...

If you dont defrag a volume thats badly fragmented, it would affect
performance. Regdg How often, it depends on how fast ur drive gets
fragmented, either monitor that regularly or just set one of the
automatic tools on the job, easier and faster as well. I have never had
any problems with defragging regularly.
 
On my home PC i defrag whenever i delete or add lots of stuff, on the
work PCs we have Diskeeper running and doing a neat job of it. Well,
you can always use the analyze feature to decide.
 
Does this mean that ALL defraggers do include some type of
error-checking and not just those incorporated on machines with ECC
RAM?
Click to expand...

Yes, your adviser is completely wrong when it comes to commercial defrag
tools. A home spun/self written defrag tool might not check the validity
of the process, but none of the commercial ones would require ECC memory
in order to properly function without data loss.
 
beevale said:
How often should the defragmenting tool be used - whenever I have
analysed
the possibilities of using it I am advised that I do not need to
defragment
this volume - yet I have also read it is good policy to defragment
system
frequently.
Click to expand...

Hi,

By using the analyze option in the defragment menu and by seeing the
view report you can definitly make a decission.If so many fragmented
files are there in the report mean it's the time for the operation.

John Mathew
 
Leythos escreveu:
Yes, your adviser is completely wrong when it comes to commercial defrag
tools. A home spun/self written defrag tool might not check the validity
of the process, but none of the commercial ones would require ECC memory
in order to properly function without data loss.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Leythos, for the clarification.
I must say I was puzzled when I heard the comment regarding the need
for ECC RAM to avoid file damage due to excessive defragmentation.
However, it was delivered with quite some vehemence and conviction that
I thought there must be something to this.
Nevertheless, a Google search really came up with no confirmation.
If anybody is interested in checking the original thread, find it here:

http://groups.google.com.br/group/a...b3b5b07d627?q=paulfxh&rnum=2#e9dc9b3b5b07d627

Paul
 
Back
Top