defrag

[Jay]

Win Xp Pro -sp 2: Is there any benefit \ harm in running defrag several
times consecutively TIA - Jay

 

[Big Al]

If you alphabetize a file cabinet and then do it again, how much work
are you doing the 2nd time and was the 2nd time required?

I think its the same.

 

[Unknown]

No harm whatsoever. Sometimes it is even beneficial---but rarely.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Win Xp Pro -sp 2: Is there any benefit \ harm in running defrag several
times consecutively TIA - Jay

There is neither benefit nor harm in doing so.

 

[db.·.. >]

there is no harm.

however because windows
"needs" to utilize files
constantly especially system
files there will always be
some degree of fragmentation.

the question is when is
it an ideal time to defrag?

my advice is to utilize the
link below to analyze your
system not only to determine
if defragmentation is required
but in other overlooked aspects
with your computer:

http://onecare.live.com/site/en-US/article/registry_cleaner_why.htm

 

[Jay]

Many thanx for the helpful responses - Jay

there is no harm.

however because windows
"needs" to utilize files
constantly especially system
files there will always be
some degree of fragmentation.

the question is when is
it an ideal time to defrag?

my advice is to utilize the
link below to analyze your
system not only to determine
if defragmentation is required
but in other overlooked aspects
with your computer:

http://onecare.live.com/site/en-US/article/registry_cleaner_why.htm

 

[doodle]

A lot of times, even after repeated defrags the windows defragger would
say that i needed to defrag it again. I am now using a third party
automatic tool to defrag my drives. It completes the defrag efficiently
in the first attempt.

 

[Unknown]

Are you paranoid?? If time means that much to you don't defrag at all. If
you are worried about any system crash
don't operate your computer. However, to prove a point, If you defrag, look
at the results. Then, defrag again and as I said
sometimes, although rarely, there IS a benefit to defragging twice.

 

[db.·.. >]

sounds interesting.

i had used a third party
defragger as well, but
it was not defragging
although the program
said it was and the stats
it produced indicated
there was no fragmentation.

have you compared the
results? maybe you can
see what windows defrag
shows you after you run
the third party version.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

I have seen cases of severe fragmentation where several passes were
necessary if I wanted a complete defragmentation. In any case I use a
second fragmentation analysis and just follow the advice in the report.
99.9% the re-analysis says that defrag is not needed.

 

[sareth]

What is the harm?

If the defrag completed during the first run, then there are n
fragmented files, and the defragger will merely analyze and quit fo
the subsequent runs.
And using the drive for any purpose involves a certain degree o
risk..defrag is no different.

Sometimes, it is not possible to defrag the drive entirely in one pass
especially with the antiquated XP defragger, so multiple passes may b
*required* especially in low space conditions.

But the time spent in running manual/scheduled defrags can be bette
utilized for other things, since there are now automatic defragmenter
that defrag in the background when required. Trul
install-it-and-forget-it...the user never has to defrag. The questio
of single or multiple passes or low space becomes irrelevant the
because the auto defragger functions 'intelligently' according to th
unutilized/available system resources.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

You probably don't need the additional wear and tear on the hard drive.

 

[Unknown]

By golly, You are paranoid. Cost effective???? Defrag continuously????
Risky??? Why do you have a computer?

 

[Big Al]

Yeh, hire that guy, I'll reformat the drive 3 times, just to make sure
its formatted.

 

[Unknown]

There is far more wear and tear on a fragmented file.

 

[Nonny]

Even with severe fragmentation, I would like to know how long it would
be after the second defrag before the system was back to the same
state of fragmentation as it was just after the first defrag.

There is no way to know that.

Run a defrag analysis every month or so to check to see if it's
needed. Don't be obsessive about defragging. Follow the advice of
your defragger to see if you should do it.

 

[Nonny]

Of course there is.

1. Run a defrag.
2. Check the level of fragmentation. (Call this F00.)

[snip]

Way too complicated. I think my second paragraph took care of the
situation:

You replied:

Yep, good advice.

Yep.

 

[Unknown]

According to your previous posts, that is not cost effective.

 

[Unknown]

And that's cost effective.

There is far more wear and tear on a fragmented file.

Finally, an accurate statement from the unknown.

 

[Unknown]

Why do you contradict yourself every other post?

It's a research project. Cost is not a factor. Try to focus.