Defragging

Hello

I sometimes run a defrag program, tho I'm not sure it helps an awful lot. I
generally use the built-in Windows utility.

There are a lot of other defraggers out there. I am not looking for
recommendations.

My question, - do all defraggers use the same 'logic' or 'policy' about how
& where files are positioned and arranged on the C drive ?

Thanks

KK

In article <>,
says...
>
> Hello
>
> I sometimes run a defrag program, tho I'm not sure it helps an awful lot. I
> generally use the built-in Windows utility.
>
> There are a lot of other defraggers out there. I am not looking for
> recommendations.
>
> My question, - do all defraggers use the same 'logic' or 'policy' about how
> & where files are positioned and arranged on the C drive ?
>
All are using the same Windows Defrag API ( a kind of library of system
calls), some use their own low level NTFS drivers.

API tells HOW files can be moved.
But similarity ends near here.

WHAT, WHEN and WHERE is fully
within proprietary logic of every defragger.


--
Poutnik
The best depends on how the best is defined.

In article <>,
says...
> I sometimes run a defrag program, tho I'm not sure it helps an awful
lot. I
> generally use the built-in Windows utility.
>
> There are a lot of other defraggers out there. I am not looking for
> recommendations.
>
> My question, - do all defraggers use the same 'logic' or 'policy' about how
> & where files are positioned and arranged on the C drive ?

As mentioned, there is a common API to do the moves, but each program
uses their own logic.

The built-in defrag is OK for basic use. It doesn't give any details,
but handles the basics. 3rd party defraggers may be able to defrag more
file types, such as the page file, MFT, etc...

I think there are several free ones that may give more details. I don't
know if they are any 'better' than the built-in one.

There are well-known paid ones, such as Diskeeper, Raxco PerfectDisk,
and others.

I personally use Diskeeper, and have been using various versions of it
since NT4. DK2010 has a feature called I-FAAST that, when combined with
background defrag, rearranges sectors to optimize load speed. Every
computer is different, but it did cut the time my login prompt appears
from about 1:30 to around 0:55.

One drawback to any defragging is that it can make a mess of image
backups, mainly when you do an incremental from a base backup. Image
backups store sector locations, so defragging moves things around, and
makes it look like more has changed. A file-based backup wouldn't notice
something like that.

Defragging may also have an effect on drives/partitions where Volume
Shadow Service is active. The sector movements may trigger shadow
copies. Diskeeper has an optional defrag method that reduces that, but
that also disables I-FAAST unless you are running 16K clusters (4K
clusters are most common.)

--
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.comcast.net/~andyross

Andrew Rossmann;1241375 Wrote:
> In article <OqJNsQrwKHA.732@newsgroup>,
> trebor@newsgroup says...> > >
> > > I sometimes run a defrag program, tho I'm not sure it helps an awful > > lot. I> > >
> > > generally use the built-in Windows utility.
> > >
> > > There are a lot of other defraggers out there. I am not looking for
> > > recommendations.
> > >
> > > My question, - do all defraggers use the same 'logic' or 'policy'
> > about how
> > > & where files are positioned and arranged on the C drive ? > > As mentioned, there is a common API to do the moves, but each program
> uses their own logic.
>
> The built-in defrag is OK for basic use. It doesn't give any details,
> but handles the basics. 3rd party defraggers may be able to defrag
> more
> file types, such as the page file, MFT, etc...
>
> I think there are several free ones that may give more details. I
> don't
> know if they are any 'better' than the built-in one.
>
> There are well-known paid ones, such as Diskeeper, Raxco PerfectDisk,
> and others.
>
> I personally use Diskeeper, and have been using various versions of it
> since NT4. DK2010 has a feature called I-FAAST that, when combined
> with
> background defrag, rearranges sectors to optimize load speed. Every
> computer is different, but it did cut the time my login prompt appears
> from about 1:30 to around 0:55.
>
> One drawback to any defragging is that it can make a mess of image
> backups, mainly when you do an incremental from a base backup. Image
> backups store sector locations, so defragging moves things around, and
> makes it look like more has changed. A file-based backup wouldn't
> notice
> something like that.
>
> Defragging may also have an effect on drives/partitions where Volume
> Shadow Service is active. The sector movements may trigger shadow
> copies. Diskeeper has an optional defrag method that reduces that, but
> that also disables I-FAAST unless you are running 16K clusters (4K
> clusters are most common.)
>
> --
> 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.comcast.net/~andyross'
> (http://home.comcast.net/%7Eandyross)


Yeah there a lot of programs available for Defrag.
But i think using the one that comes with the windows is the best
option, becz new installed programs don't have access to all files on C.
And i tried using a different program once, it destroyed my windows by
moving some system files.
So ud better stick with the vista program or if u want more details, go
and open cmd type defrag-w -v , it will give you all the details you
need.
the scales please .


--
compuwhiz93

If you liked what i said(even if you didn't), click on the scale button
on the top right side. I need some reputation guys!!!
Compuwhiz93