Defrag XP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yacht Captain
  • Start date Start date
Y

Yacht Captain

When I attempt to DEFRAG Win XP on a DELL 4550 Demension Desktop, I get the
following error message almost right away:

Some files on this volume could not be defragmented.

Any suggestions??

Thanks
 
The Windows XP Defrager can't defrag files that are currently in use such as
your pagefile. Some third party defragers will let you do an "off-line"
defrag meaning they will defrag these files when you start up your computer
but before windows completely finishes loading. I use PerfectDisk from Raxco
which is an excellent defrag utility

--

Harry Ohrn MS-MVP [Shell/User]
www.webtree.ca/windowsxp


| When I attempt to DEFRAG Win XP on a DELL 4550 Demension Desktop, I get
the
| following error message almost right away:
|
| Some files on this volume could not be defragmented.
|
| Any suggestions??
|
| Thanks
|
|
 
I find "PerfectDisk" Defrag program by Raxco is a much better defrag utility
then XP's..Schedule it to run every other night on my PC and all is always
smooth and errorless..
 
In
Pinger said:
I find "PerfectDisk" Defrag program by Raxco is a much better
defrag
utility then XP's..Schedule it to run every other night on my
PC and
all is always smooth and errorless..
Click to expand...


I like PerfectDisk, too. But for almost anyone, running it as
often as every other night is overkill. I run it about once a
month.
 
Just wondering, how does this product compare to Executive's Diskeeper
(especially as the Disk Defragmenter in XP and 2000 is a very basic version
of Diskeeper from Executive Software)?
 
These require Adobe Reader but should answer your questions
http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/whitepapers/Unique_Differences_PD6_DK8.pdf

http://www.raxco.com/products/perfe.../PD7_DK9_Defragmentation_Performance_Test.pdf

--

Harry Ohrn MS-MVP [Shell/User]
www.webtree.ca/windowsxp


| Just wondering, how does this product compare to Executive's Diskeeper
| (especially as the Disk Defragmenter in XP and 2000 is a very basic
version
| of Diskeeper from Executive Software)?
|
| | > I find "PerfectDisk" Defrag program by Raxco is a much better defrag
| utility
| > then XP's..Schedule it to run every other night on my PC and all is
always
| > smooth and errorless..
| >
| >
| > | > > When I attempt to DEFRAG Win XP on a DELL 4550 Demension Desktop, I
get
| > > the following error message almost right away:
| > >
| > > Some files on this volume could not be defragmented.
| > >
| > > Any suggestions??
| > >
| > > Thanks
| > >
| >
| >
|
|
 
Test said:
Just wondering, how does this product compare to Executive's Diskeeper
(especially as the Disk Defragmenter in XP and 2000 is a very basic version
of Diskeeper from Executive Software)?
Click to expand...

To me it has two advantages: it does not require 15% free space before
it will run; and it does a good job of consolidating free space. I
regard that as important, and Diskeeper was taking the line that it was
an unnecessary waste of time (they may have changed that view though)
 
To me it has two advantages: it does not require 15% free space before
it will run; and it does a good job of consolidating free space. I
regard that as important, and Diskeeper was taking the line that it was
an unnecessary waste of time (they may have changed that view though)
Click to expand...


Diskeeper still says that consolidating free space is a waste of
computer time and resources. (This is from the help file in their
most recent version)

Could not find anything in their help files though about whether or
not they still require 15% free space to run.
 
Les said:
Diskeeper still says that consolidating free space is a waste of
computer time and resources. (This is from the help file in their
most recent version)
Click to expand...

My response to that is that you end with free space that is so
fragmented that creating a new file will almost certainly create it
pre-fragmented. Take the case of the page file: It is often suggested
that one turns that off, defragments, then starts it up again with an
initial size such as to cover all normal needs 'thus getting a non
fragmented page file'. While I don't regard fragmentation of the page
file as being nearly so important as is made out, my reaction in the
case of a drive under Diskeeper would have to be 'Oh Yeah'
 
Back
Top