What are proffessional defragmenters for? Is Windows' defragmenter really that crap?

I can’t really see how something can really be ‘bad’ at defragmenting. What do these other ones do that Windows can’t? :confused:

I’m not an expert into it, but I know that one of the main functions that windows defragger don’t do is defrag paging file. In fact, to defrag this file is necessary to shutdown computer: it is not possible to defrag a file in use by windows itself, so a defragger needs to start before than windows, defrag all files, and then let windows start normally.

How about the fact that most people nowdays like me have huge hard drives (100GB+) and it takes sooo long to defrag with Windows defrag whereas the one I use (diskeeper) does it in a few minutes!

Hi :slight_smile:
Oh dear! What am I doing wrong? When I use DiscKeeper which I got free with some other s/w I purchased, it takes on average 4>5 times longer than when I use Windows own.
HD’s are 4 Maxtors 200gb raided into 2 pairs 0 Raid. Typical time to defrag with Windows <2min.
With DiscKeeper typical time is >7.30 min.

Hi :slight_smile:
As I understand it, when installing fresh it’s important to defrag every step of the way. By doing this in theory means that system files & paging is at beginning of drive. In a sense “partitioned” therefore no need for this area to be defragged. However in practice many things can affect this, in particular system locking up forcing restart without proper shutdown. This causes files in the paging system to be “scattered” & in the interests of performance/reliabilty defragging of this area is required. Windows will often sort this out when booting before loading Windows. Hence the appearance of those 00001 type files that are of little or no use.

Lots of things distinguish “professional” defraggers.

First and foremost on the list for me is defragging with priority - this means that instead of just defragging the files in their current order, the defragger also arranges them according to use, access time, importance, etc.

There’s also defragging the MFT, the swap file, etc.

Windows defragger is good for a free tool though.

http://www.vopt.com/VoptXP.htm http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/
Says on the product pages…
//Danne

windows xp defragger is really diskeeper, only an earlier version. the current version (9) is much better, and works in the background as a service (set it and forget it), which makes it more efective. after a couple of manual runs you’ll not even notice it, but your hdd are in best shape all the time.

It’s that it’s Diskkeeper but it doesn’t run as a service.
//Danne

“How about the fact that most people nowdays like me have huge hard drives (100GB+) and it takes sooo long to defrag with Windows defrag whereas the one I use (diskeeper) does it in a few minutes!” (by Asid)

Very good point.

“…HD’s are 4 Maxtors 200gb raided into 2 pairs 0 Raid. Typical time to defrag with Windows <2min.
With DiscKeeper typical time is >7.30 min.” (by zebadee)

Amazing. Are you really refering to defragmentation (Windows Disk Defragmenter) or I misunderstood something?? I don’t think that there are any other users on earth who can make a full defrag with Windows of a 200 GB HDD full/plenty of files in 2 minutes.

I experimented a little with one of my partitions (size:10 231 424 , free: 10 161 608) that I have never used, i.e. it contains only two folders (Recycled, System Volume Information) and the usual four ffastun files, and Windows Disk Defragmenter completed the job in 10 seconds. The conclusion is evident.

On Windows 98 it took me a couple of hours to defragment a 20 GB hard drive. Now I got Windows XP and an additional 40 GB hard drive, so I don’t even like even touching that tool anymore.

And what happens if there’s a blackout during defragmention? Won’t that leave my hard disk in a corrupted state?

But NTFS is faster at that sort of thing. :slight_smile:

And what happens if there’s a blackout during defragmention? Won’t that leave my hard disk in a corrupted state?

Ahh! No. Defraggers read one file chunk and then put it back. While there is a theoretical possibility of ONE corrupted file, it’s not likely since the changes don’t get COMMITTED until the write is completed, meaning that the original file location stays put until everything is done. :slight_smile: