J
Jou simpel kont
Enkidu said:
Nice self-nuke there, cuntfungus.
Nice self-nuke there, cuntfungus.
E
Enkidu
The former, thanks.
Cheers,
Cliff
Cheers,
Cliff
Modem said:
D
da_test
Thanks for the pointer to diskview, never seen it before.
I have also seen the layout.ini files moved towards the end of the
volume. Seems to defeat the performance gain, but it might be
argued that at least the necessary files are still contiguous and that
this gives some advantage.
I read somewhere that the reason for this placement is that the
process looks for an existing free area big enough to hold the files;
it doesn't move other files out of the way (from the outer edge,
for example) to make space for them.
Dave
D
Dave
Hello Ken.... In my last post I said that I wish they had provided a
PDF manual with the program. Today I found the link where just that
is available. A well thought out, well written 173 page technical
manual. These people continue to impress me. Most software venders
hire some 50 cent/hour 3rd world illiterate to scratch out their 6
page pamphlets they call manuals.
Unlike today's run of the mill software venders, I think these people
have more than two brain cells banging together which puts them heads
above the norm. I haven't had any need to try their support but if it
in the same class as their software and technical manuals, then I
wouldn't be surprised if they have what is called "REAL" technical
Support by "REAL" people that engage "REAL" brains to solve "REAL"
problems in the same language that the caller is speaking in.
Regards,
DW
P
Pop
f'ups to: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers
Agreed; I sometimes post simultaneously to more than one newsgroup if I have
a rather thorny or vague problem where the extra expertise might make for a
lot of timesavings and clarity in responses.
I do however, also set followups to whichever group/s turn out to have
the expertise that works best for me. Usually it's a single group, so I
simply leave a message about setting the f'ups in case anyone does want to
follow it, and let it go at that.
I suspect ani might not realize the difference between cross-posting and
multi-posting. One should never multi-post because if you're reading the
same or a subset of the groups, you're going to keep seeing the same,
identical message you just read as a New Message in each group, and that can
get to be an annoyance. With Cross-posting however, marking a file as Read
in one group marks it as read in all the other groups, too, so it's a lot
cleaner to keep track of. Then you set the specific group to use for
further communications once you know who you'd like to communicate with. I
don't think I"ve ever had to f'up to more than one group.
A great example of x-posting would be when, say, you don't know whether
an issue is hardware related or software related. You get a much larger
audience that way and if you haven'\t been abusive, usually lots of
assistance.
The best attack is to keep a crosspost as targetted as possible to get
the best response, and to be SURE the crossposting is useful. Cross posting
for no good reason will often be met with flames or at least new pilot
lights.
Sorry; </soapbox> <g>. Didn't mean to run on; you probably already know all
that.
Pop
Agreed; I sometimes post simultaneously to more than one newsgroup if I have
a rather thorny or vague problem where the extra expertise might make for a
lot of timesavings and clarity in responses.
I do however, also set followups to whichever group/s turn out to have
the expertise that works best for me. Usually it's a single group, so I
simply leave a message about setting the f'ups in case anyone does want to
follow it, and let it go at that.
I suspect ani might not realize the difference between cross-posting and
multi-posting. One should never multi-post because if you're reading the
same or a subset of the groups, you're going to keep seeing the same,
identical message you just read as a New Message in each group, and that can
get to be an annoyance. With Cross-posting however, marking a file as Read
in one group marks it as read in all the other groups, too, so it's a lot
cleaner to keep track of. Then you set the specific group to use for
further communications once you know who you'd like to communicate with. I
don't think I"ve ever had to f'up to more than one group.
A great example of x-posting would be when, say, you don't know whether
an issue is hardware related or software related. You get a much larger
audience that way and if you haven'\t been abusive, usually lots of
assistance.
The best attack is to keep a crosspost as targetted as possible to get
the best response, and to be SURE the crossposting is useful. Cross posting
for no good reason will often be met with flames or at least new pilot
lights.
Sorry; </soapbox> <g>. Didn't mean to run on; you probably already know all
that.
Pop
G
Greg Hayes/Raxco Software
This "partial defrag" only occurs if the system is "idle" at the time that
it runs and only if there is a sufficiently large enough piece of contiguous
free space for the files indicated in layout.ini to be moved into. If both
of the conditions are not met, then this "partial defrag" doesn't get
performed.
- Greg/Raxco Software
Microsoft MVP - Windows File System
Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a
commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.
Want to email me? Delete ntloader.
it runs and only if there is a sufficiently large enough piece of contiguous
free space for the files indicated in layout.ini to be moved into. If both
of the conditions are not met, then this "partial defrag" doesn't get
performed.
- Greg/Raxco Software
Microsoft MVP - Windows File System
Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a
commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.
Want to email me? Delete ntloader.
Modem Ani said:
G
Greg Hayes/Raxco Software
Ken,
The problem with Diskeeper's Performance measurement is that it is measuring
read only performance - which isn't a reflection of how drives are used
An interesting study by one of the original developers of NTFS on free space
consolidation and how NOT doing it can actually result in wasted disk seeks
and actually make drive performance worse -
http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/whitepapers/FreeSpace_WhitePaper.pdf
- Greg/Raxco Software
Microsoft MVP - Windows File System
Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a
commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.
Want to email me? Delete ntloader.
The problem with Diskeeper's Performance measurement is that it is measuring
read only performance - which isn't a reflection of how drives are used
An interesting study by one of the original developers of NTFS on free space
consolidation and how NOT doing it can actually result in wasted disk seeks
and actually make drive performance worse -
http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/whitepapers/FreeSpace_WhitePaper.pdf
- Greg/Raxco Software
Microsoft MVP - Windows File System
Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a
commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.
Want to email me? Delete ntloader.
M
Modem Ani
I give Raxco great credit for 'telling it like it is' on their web site:
"Myth 5 - We are going to use the built-in Windows defragmentation utility.
If you are working at home on a single workstation, this is probably all you
need. The built-in
defragmentation utility is woefully inadequate for enterprise use."
http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/whitepapers/defrag_tutorial.pdf
[Page 7]
PerfectDisk and similar products have their place in an enterprise setting.
For the majority of home users, even with a home network, Windows' own
defragger is completely adequate, unless you're running a web server. It's
taken a home user longer to read this post than the amount of time that will
be saved over the lifetime of their computer by running an enterprise
defragger on their system.
Modem Ani
"Myth 5 - We are going to use the built-in Windows defragmentation utility.
If you are working at home on a single workstation, this is probably all you
need. The built-in
defragmentation utility is woefully inadequate for enterprise use."
http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/whitepapers/defrag_tutorial.pdf
[Page 7]
PerfectDisk and similar products have their place in an enterprise setting.
For the majority of home users, even with a home network, Windows' own
defragger is completely adequate, unless you're running a web server. It's
taken a home user longer to read this post than the amount of time that will
be saved over the lifetime of their computer by running an enterprise
defragger on their system.
Modem Ani
Greg Hayes/Raxco Software said:
1
1badtech
Yes the Windows defrag is sufficient for home users but the other
defrag programs have nice features like being able to do a defrag at
startup and automatic scheduled defrags. Since you’re running defrag
before Windows start, the MFT and page file can be defragged as well.
defrag programs have nice features like being able to do a defrag at
startup and automatic scheduled defrags. Since you’re running defrag
before Windows start, the MFT and page file can be defragged as well.
Modem Ani said:
S
Shenan Stanley
1badtech said:
Schedule Defrag of all Drives:
http://www.dougknox.com/utility/scripts_desc/defrag_all.htm
M
Modem Ani
And how much faster does your system perform because of these features?
Look, I have no problem if people want to use a third party defragger on a
home system, even on a home network. I think they're a waste of time and
money. But so what - that's just my opinion.
My beef is with the people who sell these things and tell you that if you
don't use a third party app, you're losing out on something valuable or even
necessary.
To give an analogy to my way of thinking on this matter: You want to get the
paint protection on that new car? OK, if that's what you want. Just don't
let a salesperson tell you that it'll make the paint look better.
Modem Ani
Look, I have no problem if people want to use a third party defragger on a
home system, even on a home network. I think they're a waste of time and
money. But so what - that's just my opinion.
My beef is with the people who sell these things and tell you that if you
don't use a third party app, you're losing out on something valuable or even
necessary.
To give an analogy to my way of thinking on this matter: You want to get the
paint protection on that new car? OK, if that's what you want. Just don't
let a salesperson tell you that it'll make the paint look better.
Modem Ani
http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=11395571badtech said:
1
1badtech
I myself try not to load third party software as much as I can avoid
it, Windows already has a lot of problem on its own. I’m not trying
to sell anything here, I’m simply saying that Windows defrag takes a
long time and is a manual process that most people either ignore or
forget to do. That’s why I suggested a third party defrag program
where you can schedule an automatic defrag and runs a lot faster.
It’s not a question of how much faster your system perform, it’s how
long does it take the built-in defrag to run versus a third party
defrag.
it, Windows already has a lot of problem on its own. I’m not trying
to sell anything here, I’m simply saying that Windows defrag takes a
long time and is a manual process that most people either ignore or
forget to do. That’s why I suggested a third party defrag program
where you can schedule an automatic defrag and runs a lot faster.
It’s not a question of how much faster your system perform, it’s how
long does it take the built-in defrag to run versus a third party
defrag.
S
supra
jt said:
I purchased a defrag program. It’s great, I installed it and turned
on smart scheduler. It runs automatically in the background and it
doesn’t disrupt my computer use. I think it’s well worth the
price.
S
Synapse Syndrome
supra said:
I've never heard of Itâ?T. Seems to be a crap name.
I use Winternal's Defrag Manager v3.0. It only needs to be installed on one
machine and can defrag all other machines on the network.
ss.