MAJOR DEFAG PROBLEMS

[Guest]

i am having major problems trying to defrag my pc. Firstly i am continually
getting a pop up stating that i have i have low disk space and that i need to
delete files. So from this i am forever doing a disk clean up. When i am
trying to defrag my pc it states that it failed to create an empty document.
I have no idea what this means. I have also deleted files etc etc from my pc
to give me ample space on the harddrive to be able to defrag the pc but this
doesnt seem to work too and the same message appears. Can anyone help me
with this problem and how to solve the issue and get my pc defragged. Any
help is appreciated.

 

[Nick Blinow]

Check for: Viruses, Spyware, then go to RUN chkdsk /f
Reboot, checkdisk runs and try again.

 

[Enkidu]

i am having major problems trying to defrag my pc. Firstly i am continually
getting a pop up stating that i have i have low disk space and that i need to
delete files. So from this i am forever doing a disk clean up. When i am
trying to defrag my pc it states that it failed to create an empty document.
I have no idea what this means. I have also deleted files etc etc from my pc
to give me ample space on the harddrive to be able to defrag the pc but this
doesnt seem to work too and the same message appears. Can anyone help me
with this problem and how to solve the issue and get my pc defragged. Any
help is appreciated.

If you get to the stage where defrag has problems running, it probably
means that you need a bigger hard drive. You can scratch for space,
but in the end, it will make no difference. The essential space needed
can only increase, as you add more programs and so on.

I think it's called entropy. <grin>

Cheers,

Cliff

 

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

i am having major problems trying to defrag my pc. Firstly i am
continually getting a pop up stating that i have i have low disk
space and that i need to delete files. So from this i am forever
doing a disk clean up. When i am trying to defrag my pc it states
that it failed to create an empty document. I have no idea what this
means. I have also deleted files etc etc from my pc to give me ample
space on the harddrive to be able to defrag the pc but this doesnt
seem to work too and the same message appears. Can anyone help me
with this problem and how to solve the issue and get my pc defragged.
Any help is appreciated.

The native defragmentation tool requires around 15% free space to run. I
would recommend you ditch it and purchase a third-party tool. I use
PerfectDisk (www.raxco.com) which will defrag a drive with as little as 1%
free space. It's available as an uncrippled 30-day trial and costs £30 to
buy - and it's well worth it. You can also use it to schedule the
defragmentation runs - I have it set to defrag weekly at 2am - you can't set
the native one to do that!

 

[bumbleb]

Yes, the third party automatic defrag tools are more efficient and
faster than the built-in and have really made all the difference in
system maintenance.

 

[David Morgan \(MAMS\)]

Yes, the third party automatic defrag tools are more efficient and
faster than the built-in and have really made all the difference in
system maintenance.

Are you serious? References to some documentation to that effect?

TIA

 

[Leythos]

Are you serious? References to some documentation to that effect?

I can honestly say that I've seen this on Systems since Windows 95 was
out, and I've really seen massive improvements in performance on heavily
used file servers and even servers with fragmented databases where we
off-line defragged them.

Defragging with free-space consolidation is the way to do it.

 

[David Morgan \(MAMS\)]

I can honestly say that I've seen this on Systems since Windows 95 was
out, and I've really seen massive improvements in performance on heavily
used file servers and even servers with fragmented databases where we
off-line defragged them.

Defragging with free-space consolidation is the way to do it.

I was just curious. I've often seen the Norton stuff (not on XP) report
that a system was fully defragmented... but when shut down far enough
to regain the use of the Windows defrag tool, the drives turned out to be
virtually splattered. Haven't trusted outside stuff since then, so maybe I
should get back up to date on what's out there.

DM

 

[Edward W. Thompson]

I can honestly say that I've seen this on Systems since Windows 95 was
out, and I've really seen massive improvements in performance on heavily
used file servers and even servers with fragmented databases where we
off-line defragged them.

Defragging with free-space consolidation is the way to do it.

As far as I know there is no reliable evidence to show that third party
defrag software is more efficient, other than quicker, than the WINXP
native defrag software.
There is plenty of opinions that testify to the superiority of one Company's
software over another. The worth of these opinions is at best questionable.

 

[wayne]

the windows defrag software is a "lite" version of Diskeeper software.
I have read many different reviews and the answer for most users is
that you will not notice any "real world" difference between a fragment
and a defragmented drive. As for the best defrag scheme it is to put
the file in order but to leave the open spaces rather than try to move
all the data together. The reason to leave the spaces is twofold. As
soon a a file gets larger if you have moved all the files together you
have created new fragmentation, if you leave the open spaces it MAY
allow for file growth without adding to the fragmentation.


File fragmentation of new hard drives is kind of like processor speed
for most people in that it is not what is slowing down the system. Go
to a store and open up a program on a P4 2.8 and a 3.0 system of the
same brand you will not notice any difference. Pick a system that has
256MB of Ram and one that has 512MB you MIGHT notice a small difference.

Turn the computers off and see how long it takes Windows to start you
will see no difference between processors but will see a difference
with memory.

Now find a system that has SATA drives vs the older type and you
probably will see a small difference.



Wayne

 

[Leythos]

I was just curious. I've often seen the Norton stuff (not on XP) report
that a system was fully defragmented... but when shut down far enough
to regain the use of the Windows defrag tool, the drives turned out to be
virtually splattered. Haven't trusted outside stuff since then, so maybe I
should get back up to date on what's out there.

I don't use Norton products, only Symantec Corporate Edition AV
products.

I use Diskeeper 9 for my servers and workstations.

When I do a n off-line defrag, one where it reboots, defrags, and then
reboots back to Win, it's always packed.

When I defrag a server, like a SQL server, I will stop the SQL services
with a batch file, defrag the drives, cons. free space, then restart the
SQL services.

If you get enough exposure with fragmented files and free space you will
see the benefit no matter what the nay-sayers tell you.

 

[Leythos]

As far as I know there is no reliable evidence to show that third party
defrag software is more efficient, other than quicker, than the WINXP
native defrag software.
There is plenty of opinions that testify to the superiority of one Company's
software over another. The worth of these opinions is at best questionable.

With hundreds of servers and more than 1K in workstations, I stand by my
experience with non-Win defragging being more efficient and producing a
better result than the built-in Win defragger.

I'm not asking you to believe that I have the solution, I'm just stating
that all the people saying it doesn't do any better, or that it provides
no benefit, that those people don't live in the real world or have any
real-world experience to show for their own opinions.

I've seen web servers returned to like new performance, same for
databases, same for workstations and video editing boxes..... While Win
native defragged will defragment to a reasonable level, there just
doesn't seem to be anything as good as Diskeeper, and I've tried most of
the commercial apps out there during the last 5 years.

 

[Leythos]

the windows defrag software is a "lite" version of Diskeeper software.
I have read many different reviews and the answer for most users is
that you will not notice any "real world" difference between a fragment
and a defragmented drive. As for the best defrag scheme it is to put
the file in order but to leave the open spaces rather than try to move
all the data together. The reason to leave the spaces is twofold. As
soon a a file gets larger if you have moved all the files together you
have created new fragmentation, if you leave the open spaces it MAY
allow for file growth without adding to the fragmentation.

And a good defragger will move the commonly used files to the end of the
packed space. Different tools have different methods.

File fragmentation of new hard drives is kind of like processor speed
for most people in that it is not what is slowing down the system. Go
to a store and open up a program on a P4 2.8 and a 3.0 system of the
same brand you will not notice any difference. Pick a system that has
256MB of Ram and one that has 512MB you MIGHT notice a small difference.

Not the same at all - it's like having the same computers 256/512 and
then adding lots of apps to both, sooner or later the 256MB system will
start to crawl while the 512MB system will slow marginally.

Turn the computers off and see how long it takes Windows to start you
will see no difference between processors but will see a difference
with memory.

Now, in the real world you would use both computers for 2 years and then
measure the boot time from the fist day to the 2 year mark - you would
see a big difference. After a defrag you might see half that difference.

Now find a system that has SATA drives vs the older type and you
probably will see a small difference.

And again, it's based on more than just SATA vs IDE, the cheap
controllers don't do much, but if you have a high-end SATA controller
that's not throttled by the motherboard/CPU, then you WILL see the
difference, I know that we do.