Hi Sarah;
I've used Diskeeper in the past and have switched over to
PerfectDisk. I have a tiny network, only three Windows
2000 Servers (two are domain controllers), and two Windows
2000 Pro clients and one Windows ME notebook (usually off).
Both PD and DK are expen$ive and both about the same
price. You'll get a pretty good discount with 30k +
licenses, but for small unit retail I pay about $50 per
client and about $250 per server -- the *only* significant
difference between the client and server is the installer.
That is I get to pay a $200 server "tax" to Raxco.
Technically, I feel PerfectDisk outperforms Diskeeper.
Booth online and offline, PD *usually* produces better
results. At the time of my switch, PD was able to defrag
the MFT and DK could not (Executive Software may have
corrected this by now though). PerfectDisk does have a
weakness: If you exclude a large number of files from
defragmentation, PD uses a *lot* of RAM and it runs
slowly. It used to be *really* bad (taking nearly a GB of
RAM for 400,000 exclued files), but Raxco has improved it,
now it just runs slowly.
Microsoft has some weird gotchas in Windows 2000 that will
trip up any brand of defragger:
#1. Using the built-in file compression (in NTFS) confuses
the defragger. It appears that the OS reports the
uncompressed size to the defragger and also it seems to
uncompress and recompress files as they are moved. This
really trashes the performance of the defrag process.
Example, I have about 7.5 GB of mirrored CDs on one of my
servers. If compressed in NTFS, PD takes about 2.5 hours
for these files alone, each time I try to defrag this
volume. (It keeps thrashing in these static files, moving
them around.) If I turn off the compression, defrag
settles down after only a couple of passes and it can rip
through these files in only about 10 minutes (because it
can skip them). Suggestion: don't use NTFS file
compression, or don't bother trying to defrag NTFS
compressed volumes, or use the exclusion list (see PD
limitations though).
#2. There is a *serious* issue with the defrag process and
FRS (File Replication Service). FRS is used to replicate
AD entries between domain controllers and can also be used
as a sort of "poor man's" file mirroring service. In
Windows 2000 the defrag MOVE API triggers FRS. This causes
excessive replication traffic and in certain circumstances
can cause newly changed files to be overwritten with older
versions. Suggestion: Don't defrag the AD folders, or
don't change anything in the AD just before or during a
scheduled defrag, or don't use FRS for file mirroring, or
exclude defrag on mirrored files, or tell MS to fix the
stupid problem already (my current approach). This is
not supposed to be an issue with Windows 2003 Server.
Closing thoughts:
I've not tried Winternals' defragger, have you looked into
that one? At one time it was significantly cheaper than PD
or DK, and charging the same price for clients and
servers. However they seem to have shuffled things around
and now have a product called Defrag Manager, and they no
longer publish prices on their website. See
{
http://www.winternals.com/}
Good luck with this.
ScottyDM