so many DfrgNtfs.exe running background once kick off the defragment in vista

[Yinghe Chen]

I kicked off the disk defragment in vista, and open the Resource Monitor,
found at least 5-6 Dfrgntfs.exe is running backgrounds simultaneously, is
it designed so? Optimized for speed?

I am just hearing that the hard disk is keep on giving out noises.

 

[Jill Zoeller [MSFT]]

I've asked someone from the defrag team to answer this...stay tuned!

 

[Victoria House [MSFT]]

I want to make sure I'm 100% right as to the reason you see multiple files
with IO so I'll answer that shortly.

As for hard disk noise, this happens whenever you do a lot of read/write on
your disk, especially moving files around physically (versus moving them
from c:\users\me\documents to c:\users\me\pictures). When you download
large files or install big programs you will hear disk noise from the
hardware moving. Hard disks have a lot of moving parts. The spinning of
the spindle assembly, and seek movements of the head actuator (which has
lots of moving parts all on its own), are probably the noises you're most
aware of...

Defrag moves files around a LOT, so you get a lot of this hard disk IO noise
the whole time you defrag.

-Victoria
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <[email protected]> "Jill Zoeller [MSFT]"

I've asked someone from the defrag team to answer this...stay tuned!

Thanks!

In XP and 2003 when I defrag I typically see DfrgNtfs.exe using a fairly
large amount of RAM (just under 700MB last time I attempted to defrag my
file server's 1TB array) -- Is this still happening on Vista?

 

[Victoria House [MSFT]]

I can't say for sure how much less in Vista than XP. It is less, but XP was
before my time and I haven't tested/benchmarked this specifically. I regret
that I don't have these stats.

For Server we're making a lot of reliability and performance improvements
even on Vista. Currently I *think* we've got more than a 20% improvement on
a 1 million extent (files+extra extents) drive for Longhorn Server. SP1
will be sharing the defrag codebase with Longhorn Server, so will also have
these improvements.

Rest assured it will be loads better for SP1, and I am honestly sorry I
can't give you a number for XP vs. Vista.

So for now, don't go downgrading your RAM.

-Victoria

In message <[email protected]> "Jill Zoeller [MSFT]"

I've asked someone from the defrag team to answer this...stay tuned!

Thanks!

In XP and 2003 when I defrag I typically see DfrgNtfs.exe using a fairly
large amount of RAM (just under 700MB last time I attempted to defrag my
file server's 1TB array) -- Is this still happening on Vista?

--
It's like the time that your cat snowball got run over.
Remember honey? So what I'm saying is, all we have to
do is go down to the pound and get a new jazz man.
-- Homer Simpsons

 

[Victoria House [MSFT]]

Resource monitor takes a snapshot of what has changed in the last few
seconds, not necessarily what is changing "right this instant".

So what you are seeing is all of the files that have been read/written by
dfrgntfs since the last ResMon refresh.

Does this answer your question?

-Victoria

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <[email protected]>

I can't say for sure how much less in Vista than XP. It is less, but XP was
before my time and I haven't tested/benchmarked this specifically. I regret
that I don't have these stats.

For Server we're making a lot of reliability and performance improvements
even on Vista. Currently I *think* we've got more than a 20% improvement on
a 1 million extent (files+extra extents) drive for Longhorn Server. SP1
will be sharing the defrag codebase with Longhorn Server, so will also have
these improvements.

Rest assured it will be loads better for SP1, and I am honestly sorry I
can't give you a number for XP vs. Vista.

So for now, don't go downgrading your RAM.

Fair enough, thanks!