Why are files written already fragmented?

[Mike B]

I've got Diskeeper installed now on my Vista Ultimate machine, and notice
that Diskeeper is working in the background on defragmenting some
newly-written files... you can see the name of the file it's working on.

Question is, since there is plenty of space on my disk, and this file is
new, why does it need defragmenting at all?

My guess is that the file is perhaps not being defragmented as such, just
moved... maybe diskeeper is trying to keep all the files in a single block
and doesn't like where the OS put the file in the first place, so is merely
moving it.

Is there any way that Vista would actually write a new file that is already
fragmented (when there is plenty of room to write it as a single block)?

Mike

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <[email protected]> Mike B

I've got Diskeeper installed now on my Vista Ultimate machine, and notice
that Diskeeper is working in the background on defragmenting some
newly-written files... you can see the name of the file it's working on.

Question is, since there is plenty of space on my disk, and this file is
new, why does it need defragmenting at all?

It likely doesn't need defragmenting.

My guess is that the file is perhaps not being defragmented as such, just
moved... maybe diskeeper is trying to keep all the files in a single block
and doesn't like where the OS put the file in the first place, so is merely
moving it.

This is likely correct, Diskeeper may be "defragmenting directories"
(grouping files within a directory together on the drive)

Whether this is an ideal configuration depends on your environment and
installed software.

Is there any way that Vista would actually write a new file that is already
fragmented (when there is plenty of room to write it as a single block)?

In general, no.