Is Defragging a Waste of Time?

If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general consensus is
that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That sentiment doesn't appear
to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC "boffin"
and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or not I should
defrag periodically.

Thanks.

On Jun 10, 10:01*am, "Keith Wilby" wrote:
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general consensus is
that defragging is risky and a waste of time. *That sentiment doesn't appear
to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? *I'm no PC "boffin"
and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or not I should
defrag periodically.

Thanks.

Numpty:

Scottish usage:
a) Someone who (sometimes unwittingly) by speech or action
demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular
subject or situation to the amusement of others.


Had to look that one up. Thanks for the vocabulary boost.

IMHO, the XP defragger is fine for me. I run it a couple times a year
and don't realize any noticeable performance improvment, never lost a
byte, but the before and after pictures sometimes make me feel better
because sometimes it looks like something good must have happened.

Some people are compelled to defrag every day. I just don't get that
one.

You can download "better" defraggers and even pay for them, but I
think you will get as many opinions as people you ask. You will get
the "it depends on what you are doing with your system" responses
also.

You can also feel better after reading a little about what happens
when you defrag, what causes fragmentation, etc.

The trap not to fall into is thinking that defragging is some magic
bullet that is going to solve a percieved or major performance
issue.

If you say, "my system sure is slow", some numpty is going to come
along and assure you that you need to defrag your had drive right
away. Maybe, but more than likely a performance problem is someplace
else and you will still have your original problem after the defrag.

No it's not a waste of time and it can help speed things up a little.
How often is the part that varies, some users find that once every
few months will do the trick others defrag more often.

I would start at once a month and either lengthen or shorten
the time between defrags a experience dictates.

The risk is that if you are in the middle of defragmenting your
drive and you lose AC power. But having your PC connected
to an UPS is good practice even if you never defrag your drive.

--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com



"Keith Wilby" wrote in message
...
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general consensus
is that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That sentiment doesn't
appear to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC "boffin"
and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or not I should
defrag periodically.

Thanks.

There is no correct answer to your question, but there are plenty of
people on both sides of the argument who are passionate about their
beliefs and will engage in protracted debate whenever the topic is raised.

This argument has been going on for years, so there is plenty of
information to be found with a Google search, if you're really
interested. Thus armed, make up your own mind and don't start a fight here.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Keith Wilby wrote:
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general
consensus is that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That
sentiment doesn't appear to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC
"boffin" and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or not I
should defrag periodically.

Thanks.

Defragging speeds up backups, assuming you're using a second hard drive
to do the backup (else you'd be thrashing a single drive with a lot of
random access).

Two hard drives and multiple partitions on each make backup a lot easier.
You can install a backup OS on a different partition from the primary
OS, and use each instance of the OS to backup the other.

In my case, for a backup + defrag, I backup, compare, format, restore,
compare partitions from the primary drive, using parititions and/or
folders on the backup drive for each partition on the primary drive.

I also put the swap and temp directory on the second hard drive.

"Leonard Grey" wrote in message
...

This argument has been going on for years, so there is plenty of
information to be found with a Google search, if you're really interested.
Thus armed, make up your own mind and don't start a fight here.
---

Hi Leonard.

I'd just like to politely point out that this is not a troll, I have a
genuine interest in others' opinions on this topic and I have no interest in
starting a bun fight. Thanks for your response

Keith

Defragmenting should not be done in isolation. My routine comprises
compact Outlook Express, run cCleaner, run Disk CleanUp to reduce System
Restore restore points and finally run Disk Defragmenter. The frequency
depends on the extent of files changes. The "you do not need to
defragment message is meaningless" as the fragmented files are
invariably those you use most often. You can take measures to slow down
the impact of fragmentation notably by not letting Windows manage the
pagefile. A contiguous pagefile is desirable but many users do not
ensure this is so. Housekeeping, which includes defragmentation, is
helpful after a significant system change.

Housekeeping can noticeably help before routine malware scans. The fewer
files to check the shoter the time taken to scan.

The risk factor is red herring. As another has commented the risk is
that there might be a power failure whilst Disk Defragmenter is
running. If that is a worry install an uninteruptible power supply. I
have never lost files from the interuption of Disk Defragmenter. There
are other reasons why files get lost or corrupted. That is why a backup
strategy needs to be in place.

--


Hope this helps.

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


Keith Wilby wrote:
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general
consensus is that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That
sentiment doesn't appear to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC
"boffin" and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or
not I should defrag periodically.

Thanks.

The answer to the question 'is defrag a waste of time' is absolutely not..
"Keith Wilby" wrote in message
...
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general consensus
is that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That sentiment doesn't
appear to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC "boffin"
and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or not I should
defrag periodically.

Thanks.

There are many different thoughts to your 'routine'.
1. Compact OE---No! leave it alone.
2. Run cCleaner----absolutely not----never.
3. To reduce system restore points----Very bad mistake. Save the restore
points. You
may need them to correct the damage done by your cCleaner.
4. Run disc cleanup before defrag.


"Gerry" wrote in message
...
Keith

Defragmenting should not be done in isolation. My routine comprises
compact Outlook Express, run cCleaner, run Disk CleanUp to reduce System
Restore restore points and finally run Disk Defragmenter. The frequency
depends on the extent of files changes. The "you do not need to
defragment message is meaningless" as the fragmented files are
invariably those you use most often. You can take measures to slow down
the impact of fragmentation notably by not letting Windows manage the
pagefile. A contiguous pagefile is desirable but many users do not
ensure this is so. Housekeeping, which includes defragmentation, is
helpful after a significant system change.

Housekeeping can noticeably help before routine malware scans. The fewer
files to check the shoter the time taken to scan.

The risk factor is red herring. As another has commented the risk is that
there might be a power failure whilst Disk Defragmenter is running. If
that is a worry install an uninteruptible power supply. I have never lost
files from the interuption of Disk Defragmenter. There are other reasons
why files get lost or corrupted. That is why a backup strategy needs to be
in place.

--


Hope this helps.

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


Keith Wilby wrote:
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general
consensus is that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That
sentiment doesn't appear to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC
"boffin" and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or
not I should defrag periodically.

Thanks.

Thanks Gerry.

"Gerry" wrote in message
...
Keith

You can take measures to slow down
the impact of fragmentation notably by not letting Windows manage the
pagefile. A contiguous pagefile is desirable but many users do not
ensure this is so.

Could you expand on this please? I'm not sure I would know a pagefile if it
bit me on the leg.

Housekeeping, which includes defragmentation, is
helpful after a significant system change.

Housekeeping can noticeably help before routine malware scans. The fewer
files to check the shoter the time taken to scan.

That makes sense.


The risk factor is red herring. As another has commented the risk is that
there might be a power failure whilst Disk Defragmenter is running. If
that is a worry install an uninteruptible power supply. I have never lost
files from the interuption of Disk Defragmenter. There are other reasons
why files get lost or corrupted. That is why a backup strategy needs to be
in place.


Duly noted, thank you.

Unknown

Your views are noted but they are I strongly suspect the views of a tiny
noisy misinformed minority. Whilst I do have controversial views on some
topics you have not picked on any where I hold a minority viewpoint.

If you want a detailed explanation on any one of the 4 points you take
issue with I would be happy to respond. However, I am not prepared to
respond on all four. I am also not interested in a protracted exchange
which benefits no one.

--


Hope this helps.

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


Unknown wrote:
There are many different thoughts to your 'routine'.
1. Compact OE---No! leave it alone.
2. Run cCleaner----absolutely not----never.
3. To reduce system restore points----Very bad mistake. Save the
restore points. You
may need them to correct the damage done by your cCleaner.
4. Run disc cleanup before defrag.


"Gerry" wrote in message
...
Keith

Defragmenting should not be done in isolation. My routine comprises
compact Outlook Express, run cCleaner, run Disk CleanUp to reduce
System Restore restore points and finally run Disk Defragmenter. The
frequency depends on the extent of files changes. The "you do not
need to defragment message is meaningless" as the fragmented files
are invariably those you use most often. You can take measures to
slow
down the impact of fragmentation notably by not letting Windows
manage the pagefile. A contiguous pagefile is desirable but many
users do not ensure this is so. Housekeeping, which includes
defragmentation, is
helpful after a significant system change.

Housekeeping can noticeably help before routine malware scans. The
fewer files to check the shoter the time taken to scan.

The risk factor is red herring. As another has commented the risk is
that there might be a power failure whilst Disk Defragmenter is
running. If that is a worry install an uninteruptible power supply.
I have never lost files from the interuption of Disk Defragmenter.
There are other reasons why files get lost or corrupted. That is why
a backup strategy needs to be in place.

--


Hope this helps.

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


Keith Wilby wrote:
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general
consensus is that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That
sentiment doesn't appear to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC
"boffin" and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or
not I should defrag periodically.

Thanks.

Yes Keith but as Leonard feared others are!


--


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


Keith Wilby wrote:
"Leonard Grey" wrote in message
...

This argument has been going on for years, so there is plenty of
information to be found with a Google search, if you're really
interested. Thus armed, make up your own mind and don't start a
fight here. ---

Hi Leonard.

I'd just like to politely point out that this is not a troll, I have a
genuine interest in others' opinions on this topic and I have no
interest in starting a bun fight. Thanks for your response

Unknown wrote:
There are many different thoughts to your 'routine'.
1. Compact OE---No! leave it alone.
2. Run cCleaner----absolutely not----never.

Perhaps you mean running CrapCleaner's Registry Cleaner and not just their
cleanup features.
I agree that using registry cleaners can be dangerous.
I think CrapCleaner is an excellent product, but I don't recommend using its
Registry Cleaning feature.

3. To reduce system restore points----Very bad mistake. Save the
restore points. You
may need them to correct the damage done by your cCleaner.
4. Run disc cleanup before defrag.

Buffalo

all computer configurations
are different.

if your particular machine
seems to gain performance
improvements, then it is not
a waste of time.

the older the machine or
if the machine is newer but
has low resources, you will
be able to see an improvement.

but if your machine is powerful
with lots of cpu power, lots of
hard disk space and lots of ram,

then defragging won't make
any difference.

at best, keeping the boot up
files unfragmented and located
near the boot sector will increase
the proficiency with booting up
and loading windows.

--
db·´¯`·...¸)))º
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces
- @hotmail.com
"share the nirvana" - dbZen

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



"Keith Wilby" wrote in message
...
If you read up on defragging on another NG
(comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage) you'll find that the general consensus
is that defragging is risky and a waste of time. That sentiment doesn't
appear to be reflected on here.

Can I invite comments from this group on this please? I'm no PC "boffin"
and neither am I a numpty but I'd like to know whether or not I should
defrag periodically.

Thanks.

Keith

There are two ways that I know of to prevent the pagefile causing file
fragmentation.

You can have a dedicated pagefile partition -the recommended way is to
have the partition as the first partition on a second drive leaving a
small 50 mb pagefile on the C ( Windows ) partition.

The other way, which I currently use, is to have a single pagefile on C
with a minimum = maximum setting. The second approach can be difficult
to achieve unless when you create it you have something like 50 - 60%
free disk disk space, The reason being the pagefile likes to occupy the
centre of the volume.

Either of these approachs removes the pagefile permanently as a
contriibutor to file fragmentation.

I can make more detailed suggestions if you wish to follow up on either
option. For option 2 I would need to know the size of the C volume, the
free disk space avaulable and the installed RAM.

http://www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm

--


Hope this helps.

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

Keith Wilby wrote:
Thanks Gerry.

"Gerry" wrote in message
...
Keith

You can take measures to slow down
the impact of fragmentation notably by not letting Windows manage the
pagefile. A contiguous pagefile is desirable but many users do not
ensure this is so.

Could you expand on this please? I'm not sure I would know a
pagefile if it bit me on the leg.

Housekeeping, which includes defragmentation, is
helpful after a significant system change.

Housekeeping can noticeably help before routine malware scans. The
fewer files to check the shoter the time taken to scan.

That makes sense.


The risk factor is red herring. As another has commented the risk is
that there might be a power failure whilst Disk Defragmenter is
running. If that is a worry install an uninteruptible power supply.
I have never lost files from the interuption of Disk Defragmenter.
There are other reasons why files get lost or corrupted. That is why
a backup strategy needs to be in place.


Duly noted, thank you.