Why does XP or Win2K Defrag NOT do a complete Defrag?

  • Thread starter Thread starter casey.o
  • Start date Start date
C

casey.o

On my Win98 and Win2K computer, I was booted to 2K, and after moving
around a lot of files, I ran Defrag in W2K. Although it did defrag, it
doid NOT put all the files together. I left blank spaces between the
clusters. I booted to Win98, and immediately ran the 98 Defrag, and
proved that there were clusters of files with gaps in between. While
this may not be real important, I prefer having all files clustered
together, with all the blank space at the end. Neither Win2K or XP can
do this. Sometimes I will defrag 3 or 4 times in a row trying to get
the clusters together, (using 2K or XP) but that just can not be done.

WHY?
 
On my Win98 and Win2K computer, I was booted to 2K, and after moving
around a lot of files, I ran Defrag in W2K. Although it did defrag, it
doid NOT put all the files together. I left blank spaces between the
clusters. I booted to Win98, and immediately ran the 98 Defrag, and
proved that there were clusters of files with gaps in between. While
this may not be real important, I prefer having all files clustered
together, with all the blank space at the end. Neither Win2K or XP can
do this. Sometimes I will defrag 3 or 4 times in a row trying to get
the clusters together, (using 2K or XP) but that just can not be done.

WHY?
Click to expand...

One case I can think of, is the optimizer should not
place files into the area reserved for $MFT growth.
So that's a gap right there.

I've seen some goofy points the WinXP defragmenter stops,
so that's not likely to be the only answer. It there's enough
slack space, you should at least get everything that can be
defragmented, to defragment. But in terms of packing them
in like sardines, I've had mixed luck with that. I know
one area it avoids, is the reserved area for $MFT. But there
seem to be some other things it won't stomp on.

If you use JKDefrag, you can attempt to move everything
to the left (regardless of defragmentation result, could
be quite fragmented). But that's hardly a worthwhile
thing to be doing. It's only useful, if you were
about to shrink a partition, and you liked to watch
the JKDefrag colored squares display. I have used that
on data-only partitions, to make the partition as small
as possible (via shrink in a partition manager). A partition
manager can also move files around, and do the same thing
all by itself. It's just more fun to watch the partition
manager complete the shrink step, almost instantaneously.

Paul
 
On my Win98 and Win2K computer, I was booted to 2K, and after moving
around a lot of files, I ran Defrag in W2K. Although it did defrag, it
doid NOT put all the files together. I left blank spaces between the
clusters. I booted to Win98, and immediately ran the 98 Defrag, and
proved that there were clusters of files with gaps in between. While
this may not be real important, I prefer having all files clustered
together, with all the blank space at the end. Neither Win2K or XP can
do this. Sometimes I will defrag 3 or 4 times in a row trying to get
the clusters together, (using 2K or XP) but that just can not be done.

WHY?
Click to expand...

It's due to the difference between how MSDOS FAT32 on W98 and NTFS on
W2k work. The gaps are normal with NTFS. They actually reduce file
fragmentation. (But don't eliminate it) So, stop obsessing. You'll never
get rid of them. They're suppose to be there.

MSDOS, on the other hand, was designed to jam everything together. In
the old days of small, slow hard drives 20+ years ago, this was the most
efficient scenerio. And the easiest way to write data. However, it
caused fragmentation in big way. And, thus, was born deframentation
software.

Stef
 
Back
Top