Phillip

System Restore -"I guess it is the same reason why you think it is useless."

I have not expressed any views on the functionality of System Restore. I do
not subscribe to that view. Most of the problems from using System Restore
arise from users not understanding the mechanics of System Restore and from
third party security software ( Norton is a major offender ) who have
written software which does not deal with it's relationship with System
Restore in a responsible manner.


--


Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Phillip Pi" wrote in message
...
On 3/10/2009 12:57 PM PT, Gerry wrote:

Earlier you queried whether there might be speed improvements from
changing the cluster size. This is not an easy one to answer as any
performance gains are difficult to measure and often subjective. The
performance benefits coming from a larger cluster size arise from a
reduced rate of file fragmentation where the average file size is large.
You are of course trying to resolve a situation where file fragmentation
has become a serious problem so ideally you would not want something that
speeds up fragmentation. You will see a noticeable improvement if you
can eliminate fragmentation but this will only last for a while until you
need to cleanup and defragment again. I suspect that the preliminary disk
cleanup helps as much as defragmentation. Apart from resolving severe
fragmentation defragmenting is only one measure contributing to better
system performance. Other factors are often more important. The CPU
capacity and the amount of RAM are the more important normal bottlenecks
holding back system performance but there are a number of other factors
which can apply. I do not think changing the cluster size is worthwhile
given the likely benefits.

Yeah, it's a tedious process to complete too. Also, risky if something
goes wrong.


You would see an improved system performance if you could increase the
available free disk space to 25 to 35% but this is not easily measurable.

OK.


You have a pagefile on volume E, which is part of a single drive. Most
people, who have diverse views on best practice regarding the pagefile,
would not consider this helps system performance. You should either have
a single pagefile on volume C or have a dedicated pagefile partition as
the first partition on a second hard drive leaving a small pagefile in
volume C. Which is best causes many heated debates between the two
opposing viewpoints but no one would advocate what you have to achieve
best performance.

OK.


The logic underlying the partition structure is unclear to me. What is
meant to be the purpose of each partition? I cannot see the benefit to be
gained from moving files from C to D as both have limited free space. I
cannot see any system restore points. Has system restore been turned off.
With regard to C you might look at the points detailed below, which may
marginally help.

IT disabled system restore feature (enabling it gets denied). I guess it
is the same reason why you think it is useless.


Another default setting which could be wasteful is that for temporary
internet files, especially if you do not store offline copies on disk.
The default allocation is 3% of drive. Depending on your attitude to
offline copies you could reduce this to 1% or 2%. In Internet Explorer
select Tools, Internet Options, General, Temporary Internet Files,
Settings to make the change. At the same time look at the number of days
history is held.

I don't use offline feature. TIF is at 1%.


The default allocation for the Recycle Bin is 10 % of drive. Change to
5%, which should be sufficient. In Windows Explorer place the cursor
on your Recycle Bin, right click and select Properties, Global and
move the slider from 10% to 5%. However, try to avoid letting it get
too full as if it is full and you delete a file by mistake it will
bypass the Recycle Bin and be gone for ever.

I lowered from 30% to 5% to see how that goes. I usually keep my recycle
bin almost empty.


Select Start, All Programs, Accessories, System Tools, System
Information, Tools, Dr Watson and verify that the box before "Append to
existing log" is NOT checked. This means the next time the log is
written it will overwrite rather than add to the existing file.

Already unchecked.


If your drive is formatted as NTFS another potential gain arises with
your operating system on your C drive. In the Windows Directory of
your C partition you will have some Uninstall folders in your Windows
folder typically: $NtServicePackUninstall$ and $NtUninstallKB282010$
etc. These files may be compressed or not compressed. If compressed
the text of the folder name appears in blue characters. If not
compressed you can compress them. Right click on each folder and
select Properties, General, Advanced and check the box before Compress
contents to save Disk Space. On the General Tab you can see the amount
gained by deducting the size on disk from the size. Folder
compression is only an option on a NTFS formatted drive / partition.

Yes, it is in NTFS and has compress feature. I do delete old hotfixes, SP2
upgrade, etc.

I find it strange for IT to make my D: drive the local Windows account
directories/folders. It seems like they made C: for system stuff, D: for
data stuff, etc.
--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
-----------------------------------------------------
Email: YMC (remove SYMC to reply by e-mail)
-----------------------------------------------------
Please do NOT e-mail me for technical support. DISCLAIMER: The views
expressed in this posting are mine, and do not necessarily reflect the
views of my employer. Thank you.