Cannot defragment hard drive all the way

[haroldact]

I was recently trying to defragment my hard drive (tried using Norton
Speed Disk as well as the Windows XP defrag program). My hard drive is
35% fragmented. I also have about 6GB Free space (out of 15GB C I
have run both programs but it will not allow me to be any less than 35%
fragmented. How do I defragment my drive so it is 0% fragmented? Do I
need to use another program? Delete something? Thanks.

Harold

 

[Peter]

Find out which files are most fragmented. Zip them with folders info to one
big zip file. Remove fragmented files. Try to defragment again. Unzip them
to original place.

 

[Al Dykes]

Find out which files are most fragmented. Zip them with folders info to one
big zip file. Remove fragmented files. Try to defragment again. Unzip them
to original place.

d/l the eval copy of PerfectDisk (www.raxco.com) and run it. If
necessary have it do a reboot defrag.

 

[Chris Pound]

I was recently trying to defragment my hard drive (tried using Norton
Speed Disk as well as the Windows XP defrag program). My hard drive is
35% fragmented. I also have about 6GB Free space (out of 15GB C I
have run both programs but it will not allow me to be any less than 35%
fragmented. How do I defragment my drive so it is 0% fragmented? Do I
need to use another program? Delete something? Thanks.

Harold

According to Rod Speed you never have to Defrag anyway.

 

[Yousuf Khan]

I was recently trying to defragment my hard drive (tried using Norton
Speed Disk as well as the Windows XP defrag program). My hard drive is
35% fragmented. I also have about 6GB Free space (out of 15GB C I
have run both programs but it will not allow me to be any less than 35%
fragmented. How do I defragment my drive so it is 0% fragmented? Do I
need to use another program? Delete something? Thanks.

Depending on how big the file is, some files can't really be
defragmented down to 1 part very easily on NTFS, unlike in FAT. Last
time I looked into these things, NTFS (and its predecessor, HPFS on
OS/2) was organized into fixed-size regions on the disk. If a specific
file was bigger than the size of a region, then that file would be
spread over multiple regions. About the only way to make those huge
files 1 contiguous file would be put them on adjacent regions. Each of
the regions are huge, several megabytes. I think most defrag programs
don't bother to make files contiguous between regions, they are happy to
simply make them contiguous within a region.

But it's not necessary to worry about getting defragmented to so much of
an extent. The whole idea of defragmenting is to reduce latency by
reducing physical head movements on the disk. When you got files big
enough to occupy multiple regions, then you're way beyond worrying about
disk latency, and you have to worry about disk bandwidth.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Rod Speed]

(e-mail address removed) wrote

According to Rod Speed you never have to Defrag anyway.

Lying, again. I used the word MOST for a reason, ****wit.

 

[Eric Gisin]

This "X% fragmented" is meaningless. Look at the number of fragmented files. I
bet they are all huge.

 

[Chris Pound]

Lying, again. I used the word MOST for a reason, ****wit.

"And the main reason that defragging is a waste of time is
because modern drives seek very quickly and modern OSs
have the heads moving around over the drive quite a bit
when large files are read from end to end as well."

 

[Rod Speed]

"And the main reason that defragging is a waste of time is
because modern drives seek very quickly and modern OSs
have the heads moving around over the drive quite a bit
when large files are read from end to end as well."

Pity about the earlier post of mine on that where I used the word MOST, liar.