chkdsk and defrag

[grok]

Are these safe to run? Can they do damage to my system? If they are safe
how frequently should they be run?

[R. McCarty]

A good question. First you should always do a Chkdsk on the
volume before doing a defrag. The basic Chkdsk only scans &
checks for inconsistencies. If found, it (Chkdsk) will recommend
a more comprehensive /F /R (Fix or Repair). This is more risky.
Any repairs made by Chkdsk can sometimes does remove data.
I wouldn't ever do a Chkdsk /F /R without minimal backup on
the data and preferably a image of the volume

How often depends on factors like how full your drive is, daily
usage and how much data movement ( Create/Edit/Delete ) you
do. A basic Chkdsk ( Chkdsk C: ) from a command prompt is
something you should probably do every few weeks. You can
alternately invoke a command to ask the drive if it's "Dirty" (needs
a Chkdsk run on it ) Enter this from a Cmd prompt window.
FSUtil Dirty Query C:
It will respond with Is or is Not Dirty.

On defrag scheduling, Once a month will probably keep things in
order - but it varies depending on use.

"grok" > wrote in message
...
> Are these safe to run? Can they do damage to my system? If they are safe
> how frequently should they be run?

[Ken Blake, MVP]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 17:31:56 -0400, "R. McCarty"
> wrote:

> A good question. First you should always do a Chkdsk on the
> volume before doing a defrag.


Sorry, I don't agree with this at all. You never need to run chkdsk
unless you have reason to suspect a problem. I defrag regularly (once
a month or so) but never run chkdsk.


> The basic Chkdsk only scans &
> checks for inconsistencies. If found, it (Chkdsk) will recommend
> a more comprehensive /F /R (Fix or Repair). This is more risky.
> Any repairs made by Chkdsk can sometimes does remove data.
> I wouldn't ever do a Chkdsk /F /R without minimal backup on
> the data and preferably a image of the volume
>
> How often depends on factors like how full your drive is, daily
> usage and how much data movement ( Create/Edit/Delete ) you
> do. A basic Chkdsk ( Chkdsk C: ) from a command prompt is
> something you should probably do every few weeks. You can
> alternately invoke a command to ask the drive if it's "Dirty" (needs
> a Chkdsk run on it ) Enter this from a Cmd prompt window.
> FSUtil Dirty Query C:
> It will respond with Is or is Not Dirty.
>
> On defrag scheduling, Once a month will probably keep things in
> order - but it varies depending on use.
>
> "grok" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Are these safe to run? Can they do damage to my system? If they are safe
> > how frequently should they be run?
>

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

[DL]

I agree;
I cannot remember the last time I ran Chkdsk 2+ years ago? on a sys thats
run, & runs proccesses, 24/7
I do run Executive Diskeeper (defrag)

"Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 17:31:56 -0400, "R. McCarty"
> > wrote:
>
>> A good question. First you should always do a Chkdsk on the
>> volume before doing a defrag.
>
>
> Sorry, I don't agree with this at all. You never need to run chkdsk
> unless you have reason to suspect a problem. I defrag regularly (once
> a month or so) but never run chkdsk.
>
>
>> The basic Chkdsk only scans &
>> checks for inconsistencies. If found, it (Chkdsk) will recommend
>> a more comprehensive /F /R (Fix or Repair). This is more risky.
>> Any repairs made by Chkdsk can sometimes does remove data.
>> I wouldn't ever do a Chkdsk /F /R without minimal backup on
>> the data and preferably a image of the volume
>>
>> How often depends on factors like how full your drive is, daily
>> usage and how much data movement ( Create/Edit/Delete ) you
>> do. A basic Chkdsk ( Chkdsk C: ) from a command prompt is
>> something you should probably do every few weeks. You can
>> alternately invoke a command to ask the drive if it's "Dirty" (needs
>> a Chkdsk run on it ) Enter this from a Cmd prompt window.
>> FSUtil Dirty Query C:
>> It will respond with Is or is Not Dirty.
>>
>> On defrag scheduling, Once a month will probably keep things in
>> order - but it varies depending on use.
>>
>> "grok" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Are these safe to run? Can they do damage to my system? If they are
>> > safe
>> > how frequently should they be run?
>>
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

[Uncle Grumpy]

"Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote:

>On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 17:31:56 -0400, "R. McCarty"
> wrote:
>
>> A good question. First you should always do a Chkdsk on the
>> volume before doing a defrag.
>
>Sorry, I don't agree with this at all. You never need to run chkdsk
>unless you have reason to suspect a problem.

But it doesn't hurt (or take much time) to run it.

>I defrag regularly (once a month or so) but never run chkdsk.

Many "experts" would say that such a schedule for defragging in XP is
totally unnecessary ;-)

I for one agree.

[Ken Blake, MVP]

On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:47:47 -0500, Uncle Grumpy
> wrote:

> "Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 17:31:56 -0400, "R. McCarty"
> > wrote:
> >
> >> A good question. First you should always do a Chkdsk on the
> >> volume before doing a defrag.
> >
> >Sorry, I don't agree with this at all. You never need to run chkdsk
> >unless you have reason to suspect a problem.
>
> But it doesn't hurt (or take much time) to run it.


That's true, but irrelevant to my comment. The statement "you should
always do a Chkdsk on the volume before doing a defrag" is not
correct, and I pointed that out.



> >I defrag regularly (once a month or so) but never run chkdsk.
>
> Many "experts" would say that such a schedule for defragging in XP is
> totally unnecessary ;-)
>
> I for one agree.


How often to defrag depends on how you use your computer and how much
you use your computer. There is no single schedule that's right for
everybody.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

[Uncle Grumpy]

"Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote:

>> Many "experts" would say that such a schedule for defragging in XP is
>> totally unnecessary ;-)
>>
>> I for one agree.
>
>
>How often to defrag depends on how you use your computer and how much
>you use your computer. There is no single schedule that's right for
>everybody.

Given the speed of today's processors, I think it's safe to say that
the benefits of defragging are more a figment of one's obsessive
imagination than they are of real value.

[Jim]

"Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:47:47 -0500, Uncle Grumpy
> > wrote:
>
>> "Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 17:31:56 -0400, "R. McCarty"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> A good question. First you should always do a Chkdsk on the
>> >> volume before doing a defrag.
>> >
>> >Sorry, I don't agree with this at all. You never need to run chkdsk
>> >unless you have reason to suspect a problem.
>>
>> But it doesn't hurt (or take much time) to run it.
>
>
> That's true, but irrelevant to my comment. The statement "you should
> always do a Chkdsk on the volume before doing a defrag" is not
> correct, and I pointed that out.
>
>
>
>> >I defrag regularly (once a month or so) but never run chkdsk.
>>
>> Many "experts" would say that such a schedule for defragging in XP is
>> totally unnecessary ;-)
>>
>> I for one agree.
>
>
> How often to defrag depends on how you use your computer and how much
> you use your computer. There is no single schedule that's right for
> everybody.
>
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup
I am with Ken here. I only run chkdsk when I feel like it; perhaps once or
twice per year. Every now and then (once per month or so), I run dfrag. I
only defrag when the utility tells me to (perhaps one time out of four).

I really suspect that the benefits of dfragmentation these days is more
cosmetic than anything else.

Jim

[Uncle Grumpy]

"Jim" > wrote:

>I am with Ken here. I only run chkdsk when I feel like it; perhaps once or
>twice per year. Every now and then (once per month or so), I run dfrag. I
>only defrag when the utility tells me to (perhaps one time out of four).
>
>I really suspect that the benefits of dfragmentation these days is more
>cosmetic than anything else.

So you agree that defragging is a waste of time.

[Xenomorph]

they will DESTROY your system


"grok" > wrote in message
...
> Are these safe to run? Can they do damage to my system? If they are safe
> how frequently should they be run?

[Jim]

"Uncle Grumpy" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim" > wrote:
>
>>I am with Ken here. I only run chkdsk when I feel like it; perhaps once
>>or
>>twice per year. Every now and then (once per month or so), I run dfrag.
>>I
>>only defrag when the utility tells me to (perhaps one time out of four).
>>
>>I really suspect that the benefits of dfragmentation these days is more
>>cosmetic than anything else.
>
> So you agree that defragging is a waste of time.
>
>
Yes.

Jim

[Plato]

=?Utf-8?B?Z3Jvaw==?= wrote:
>
> Are these safe to run? Can they do damage to my system? If they are safe
> how frequently should they be run?

Generally no damage will rusult in running either.

--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

[RalfG]

Not really. Fragmentation probably isn't an issue if all you work with is
piddling little document files but working with media files is another
matter. File fragmentation has been the #1 cause of most of my failed full
speed CD/DVD burns. Not that there have been a lot of those but it is
excessively annoying when it happens and can be expensive. That would be
verification errors on individual files after burning. Repeating the burn at
high speed often repeats the errors in those same files, while defragging or
greatly reducing the writing speed results in a clean burn. 3.2Ghz is not
exactly slow, nether is my SATA harddrive but if the fragmentation is high
enough in a given file, and it can run into many hundreds or even over 1000
fragments for a single file, then even playback of video files can become
jerky or irregular. Software is the main cause of the fragmented files.
Running certain apps over a period of 2-3 months can push file fragmentation
over 50%.

As far as the need to run chkdsk I think that also varies according to
individual circumstances. I've often seen the situation that after some game
or other software had crashed chkdsk would report misallocated space or
cross-linked files on the drive in question. Whether those problems would
cause other operational errors I couldn't say, but simply recovering lost
drive space which can amount to several megabytes is worthwhile in itself.


"Uncle Grumpy" > wrote in message
...
> "Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote:
>
>>> Many "experts" would say that such a schedule for defragging in XP is
>>> totally unnecessary ;-)
>>>
>>> I for one agree.
>>
>>
>>How often to defrag depends on how you use your computer and how much
>>you use your computer. There is no single schedule that's right for
>>everybody.
>
> Given the speed of today's processors, I think it's safe to say that
> the benefits of defragging are more a figment of one's obsessive
> imagination than they are of real value.

[pegasus]

I agree that chkdsk is not required unless you suspect a HDD problem.
And, if you suspect a HDD mechanical/magnetic media problem, replace the
drive ASAP rather than take chances.

But it is good to defrag regularly. By regularly, I mean as regularly
as your usage patterns dictate. If you work with large audio/video files
or game a lot, its good to defrag atleast once a week. Even with heavy
usage of Office apps, defragmentation can slow down things a bit. If you
do only email on your PC, then probably, fragmentation is not your main
concern. Heavily used slower PCs with lower-end CPUs, lower RAM and
slower HDDs would also stand to gain the most from defragmenting
regularly.

Whoever said fragmentation has no effect on the performance is wrong.

The processors + RAM may be **** fast today, and ironically, for that
reason they are *not* the weak link in the I/O + processing chain. The
bottleneck is the *relatively* (compared to the RAM+CPU) slow mechanical
harddrive which ultimately may determine overall system performance. The
problem is magnified when working with many, large files. This is again
the reason why in the commercial sector, defragmentation software is
widely used on servers.


--
pegasus

[Bill Sharpe]

Xenomorph wrote:
> they will DESTROY your system
>
Been using chkdsk and defrag since the l980's and haven't lost a system
yet...

Bill