About Defrag

Electronics Computer Programming Q&A
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by MrAl »

kheston wrote:The horizontal "bar graph" is a pretty good indicator, especially when you have a really fragmented drive. Lots of red and single columns of any color indicate Windows is having to dance the read/write head in your drive a bit to load/save a complete file. What you want to see is long green and blue bars. A little red is ok.

I usually run defrag in the command-line manner I posted above. The messages it gives in the dos window are a bit ambiguous. However, I've noticed that when a drive is really completely defragmented, defrag.exe returns the command prompt almost instantaneously.

Try the script and you may find the first couple of passes/iterations take some time but that they complete faster and faster each time it runs.
Hi there,

Well, "A little red is ok" is why i was telling Robert that it is a good idea to look at the actual written report (with Notepad
or whatever) because one little red bar can stand for 1 fragment or 100 fragments. The written report however will
show the actual number, such as "53 fragments", which the little red bars can not show.
If you have never done this (i am guessing you have though) take a look and tell me what you find; if it seems like
any better help or indication of the state of the drive.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by Robert Reed »

Well here is a copy of the Defrag report.Two red bars were showing on the bar graph befor defrag. I am not sure what all the terms mean, so I hope it makes more sense to you. The previous Defrag was done less than 24 hrs. ago.

[img][img]http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/1387/59477552.th.jpg[/img][/img]
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by MrAl »

Hi Robert,


That report looks reasonable to me, except for the 'volume fragmentation' part.
The file fragmentation looks good, yet it is still showing 23 percent in the volume
fragmentation section.

What happens if you try defragging it a second time?

BTW, Auslogics makes an NTFS defragger that is free and works pretty well and it
is fairly fast too. You may want to try that.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by Robert Reed »

MrAl
Here is Defrag Report for 6-7-09 10 PM:
[img][img]http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/5329/68168757.th.jpg[/img][/img]

Here is Analysis report (Detail and Summary) for 6-8-09 1PM:
[img][img]http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/4993/80796052.th.jpg[/img][/img]
[img][img]http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/9153/92250872.th.jpg[/img][/img]

Here is report on Defrag that directly followed analysis (6-8-09 2PM):
[img][img]http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/6099/35227871.th.jpg[/img][/img]

Incidently, that last defrag was the fastest ever <2 minutes.
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by MrAl »

Hi again,


Sorry i cant seem to help here because your "Volume fragmentation/File fragmentation" percentage
does not match your "File fragmentation/Total fragmented files" entry. Why this happened i just
dont know. On my system these two correlate perfectly, so when one is low the other is low or
zero too. For two examples:

Before Defrag:
File fragmentation 4%
Total files: 156,434
Total fragmented files: 6,390

After Defrag:
File fragmentation 0%
Total files: 156,436
Total fragmented files: 0

Notice how "File fragmentation" correlates with "Total fragmented files" divided by "Total files"
so perfectly.

You'd have to find out why yours doesnt show this same correlation. I would bet that the defrag
always says it needs defragging because either it calculates incorrectly or there are really
files still in need of defragging.
I would definitely try that other free defrag tool i told you about and see if that helps.
Perhaps one run would correct the problem.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by Robert Reed »

Thanx MrAl
First chance I get I will run the program you suggest and will leave you know the results.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by Robert Reed »

OK, downloaded and ran Auslogics Defrag. Very quick - 32 seconds to defrag 165 files. Then ran analysis from XP. It said I needed Defrag, so I ran their program (Windows). Went very quick < 1 minute. The report still showed the same data as the previous posting. Something must be messed up in their program, but as long as Auslogics is happy with the job its doing, I guess my disc is properly DEFRAGGED.
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by MrAl »

Hi again,


Yes, at least now you can be pretty sure it is actually defragged.

BTW, what XP service pack are you running?
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
User avatar
dacflyer
Posts: 4748
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 1:01 am
Location: USA / North Carolina / Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by dacflyer »

about the heads floating on air as Janitor Tzap said..
i thought the heads are floated by the maganetics of the disk spinning,
because a long time ago,i built as a project a mag-lev device. like the one shown below.

look here ---> http://www.electricstuff.co.uk/neodym.html its about 3/4 of the way down..
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by Robert Reed »

XP Service Pack 3
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by MrAl »

Hi again,

Robert:
Oh ok, i wouldnt have expected a problem with that, unless it got corrupted.

dac:
Yes, they float on a very very thin layer of air.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
User avatar
dacflyer
Posts: 4748
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 1:01 am
Location: USA / North Carolina / Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by dacflyer »

Hmm so its air that floats the heads or magnetism that floats them ?
i always thought magnetics :P because of the experiment i had done..
dyarker
Posts: 1917
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Izmir, Turkiye; from Rochester, NY
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by dyarker »

It is air.

The recording medium is magnetic. Other magnetic fields in the drive would be a very bad idea!

Cheers,
Dale Y
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by MrAl »

Hi again,

dac & dyark:
Yeah, i was going to mention that next :smile:


Robert:
I noticed that my defrag (XP also) isnt perfect either! Now i noticed that although the
defrag process completes and says "done", only the files are defragged and it actually
leaves some free space fragmented. If i run it two or three times it starts to compress
the free space a bit better, but that's a pain. I'll try the other program i mentioned
today and see if it does ALL the free space before it completes.
I guess XP's defrag is just dumb.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: About Defrag

Post by Robert Reed »

Yea
I notice a lot of glithes in the system over the period of time I have run XP. Never seemed to have had any trouble with the old "98". Now, when thet give me some meaningless diologue box, I find its easier in some cases just to scratch out and start over from the beggining.
As a side note, I saw this definition somewhere - "New technology is something that doesn't quite work right yet" :grin:
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 14 guests