A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Defragger and SSD defrag ?



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16  
Old May 9th 18, 06:20 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
R.Wieser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,302
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

Wolf,

I have no idea how the disk drive handled these differences.


I know that my C64 "breadbox" stored the next sector number in the first two
byte of the current one. Hence it also returned just 254 bytes per sector.

When doing a sequential read it could therefore go and retrieve the next
sector while waiting for the "current sector OK, give me the next" signal.
Something which ofcourse wasn't possible when doing random access.

The only really "major" thing I did with that drive was to get it to emulate
subdirectories, I felt like quite something that it wanted to work for me.
:-)

The disk drive was a smart device, seen as destination and source of data
by the OS, not as resource to be managed.


Yup. And with the right instruction you could perform a drive-to-drive
copy, leaving your 'puter free for other stuff. Not that you could do much
without a drive, but thats a fully other problem.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


Ads
  #17  
Old May 9th 18, 06:45 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
David E. Ross[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

On 5/8/2018 1:50 PM, I previously wrote in part:

As Wieser describes, defragging an SSD will not accomplish anything. By
writing unnecessarily to the SSD, defragging can actually shorten the
useful life of an SSD.


I have a PNY SSD. From the PNY Web site's FAQ, I read:

Do SSDs require defragging?

No, it is not necessary or recommended to defrag an SSD. Since there
are no physical disks, there is not need to organize the data in
order to reduce seek time. SSDs have TRIM, which serves the same
basic function to make your drive faster without subjecting the drive
to the extra workload. Defragging an SSD will put undue wear and tear
on the drive and may actually shorten its life.

--
David E. Ross
http://www.rossde.com/

First you say you do, and then you don't.
And then you say you will, but then won't.
You're undecided now, so what're you goin' to do?
From a 1950s song
That should be Donald Trump's theme song. He obviously
does not understand "commitment", whether it is about
policy or marriage.
  #18  
Old May 9th 18, 07:20 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-05-09 11:34, NY wrote:
"David E. Ross" wrote in message
news
Two actions are really meaningless for SSDs.


The other action that is meaningless is erasing files. The writing
needed to erase a file might fail to over-write that file. While the
pointer to the file might be erased, the file contents remain untouched.
Only a total erasure of the entire device could have any meaning.
Details about this are at http://eraser.heidi.ie/.


As with any storage device (whether SSD or HDD), when you erase or
overwrite
a file, you are not deleting the contents at that time; instead you are
returning the "sectors" (to use HDD terminology) to a pool which can
be used
for a new/updated file at some time in the future.

It still makes sense to erase files that are no longer needed, so as
to free
up space and for general housekeeping. But unless you overwrite all the
unused sectors that are not allocated to files/folders (or erase the
whole
device, as you say), then there is the possibility that someone may be
able
to undelete the file - that applies to HDD as much as to SSD.


So I'd say that defragging an SSD doesn't make sense, but erasing a
file makes as much or as little sense for both HDD and SSD.



Semantics alert:

"Erase" = "Overwrite data"
"Delete" = "Mark filename as Deleted, and mark sectors/clusters as
Available"

Best,


You can do both if you want.

You can do a defragmenter run first. Followed by a run of
Sysinternals SDELETE with the -z option to zero white space.
Then, there will be nothing for Recuva to find, and the file
system will be in a "maximally recoverable" state in the
event the partition header got erased or something. Scavenger
file recovery programs work best, if the files were
defragmented before the accident happened.

I don't think anyone has that much of a disk fetish though.

Paul

  #19  
Old May 9th 18, 07:34 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

NoonName wrote:
Posted in Win 7 because there is more activity there/here and most of
you in the Win 7 group have or once had Win XP so are very knowledgeable
regarding Win XP.
Win XP group gets little attention.

Read my original post.

Defragger for HDD ! Answered: Piriform.

Would defrag help for SSD ? Answered: minimally and possible too
much wear.

You all must be non native Martian speakers.

So, SSD degree of success depends more on the PC chip set !
I have several Win XP Pro laptops that have Samsung SSDs installed.
Samsung Magician tests and sets them up.
It also identifies that capabilities of the SDD depending on the
laptop's chip set.
The same SSD will run much faster with "better" chip sets.
These laptops are the same manufacturer, Fujitsu.
No way of telling without just trying.
In any case, all laptops with the model Samsung SSD run much better,
faster and are reliable. (Plug for Samsung SSD)
If interested, get the Samsung with the lifetime warranty, by paying a
little more. One package includes a cable to do the HDD to SSD transfer.

I am not in any way affiliated with Samsung, just a very happy Samsung
SSD owner (installed in three laptops).


Did you align the partition on it ?

You might get some idea, by using PTEDIT32 and looking
at the numbers involved. If a lot of the numbers on the
right are divisible by 63, then you're probably not aligned
optimally for WinXP.

A way to align for free, was to use Macrium Reflect Free
during cloning, which has an align choice box during the clone.

(The seventh frame in this filmstrip, shows the alignment dialog)

https://postimg.cc/image/soq5qlgrx/

Aligning is even useful on 512e drives being used on WinXP.
Lucky for me, the last hard drive I got for WinXP was
a 512n drive. If you need a hard drive today for WinXP,
I recommend a 2TB drive from the WD Gold series, as they're
the last 512n I know of.

Paul
  #20  
Old May 9th 18, 10:07 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 586
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

"Good Guy" wrote in message
news On 09/05/2018 18:00, NoonName wrote:


Win XP group gets little attention.



Best thing is to avoid XP newsgroup completely; It is dead.
Kaput!!!!!!!!!!!

Nobody in their right mind should be using XP; If they are so fond of
their old machines then they should install that crap called Linux. XP is
not supported and it gets no monthly updates.


I still have an XP PC which is used solely for digitising analogue
videotapes to MPG, because its capture card (which isn't supported by later
versions of Windows) gives much better results than more modern USB
adaptors. But I don't connect it to the internet and I only transfer data
(MPG files) via memory stick, so the chances of it becoming infected are
infinitesimal.

Otherwise, yes, XP is too risky nowadays.

  #21  
Old May 10th 18, 01:14 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ant[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 554
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

NY wrote:

I still have an XP PC which is used solely for digitising analogue
videotapes to MPG, because its capture card (which isn't supported by later
versions of Windows) gives much better results than more modern USB
adaptors. But I don't connect it to the internet and I only transfer data
(MPG files) via memory stick, so the chances of it becoming infected are
infinitesimal.


Otherwise, yes, XP is too risky nowadays.


It's fine for offline usage.
--
Quote of the Week: "Cheerios: Hula-hoops for ants." --unknown
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
| |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link.
\ _ /
( )
  #22  
Old May 10th 18, 03:26 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Mark Lloyd[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,756
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

On 05/09/2018 12:20 PM, R.Wieser wrote:

[snip]

Yup. And with the right instruction you could perform a drive-to-drive
copy, leaving your 'puter free for other stuff. Not that you could do much
without a drive, but thats a fully other problem.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


IIRC, for a dual drive you can use the command "D1=0".

Once at a user group meeting a saw someone had a program that would
allow multiple copies without connecting a computer (just once to load
that program). You put the disk to copy in drive 0 and a blank disk in
drive 1. It starts copying automatically. Drive lights show when it's done.

You could even copy between units (including drive to printer) leaving
the computer free, although the I/O bus would be unavailable to it.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

Why be born again, when you can just grow up?
  #23  
Old May 10th 18, 08:01 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
R.Wieser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,302
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

Mark,

IIRC, for a dual drive you can use the command "D1=0".


In all my time with the C64 I've only seen a double-drive configuration a
few times. And although I did fork over the money for that "breadbox" C64
drive because I got fed up rather fast with the casettes (always had to
verfy the program - on a medium that was already slow - to be sure it would
"stick". And I learned that the hard way. :-( )

Once at a user group meeting a saw someone had a program that would allow
multiple copies without connecting a computer (just once to load that
program)


As you could upload-end-execute programs onto the drives themselves (which
is what I did to get those "subdirectories" I spoke of earlier) I can easily
imagine that.

You could even copy between units ...


Thats the only way I saw it done.

... leaving the computer free, although the I/O bus would be unavailable
to it.


I once or twice considered throwing something together that would
effectivily create two seperate busses (a couple of 74xx open-collector
driver chips would have done it), but as I never had the pleasure of having
more than one device for that bus I had no reason to build it. Oh well.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


  #24  
Old May 11th 18, 04:47 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Mark Lloyd[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,756
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

On 05/10/2018 02:01 PM, R.Wieser wrote:
Mark,

IIRC, for a dual drive you can use the command "D1=0".


In all my time with the C64 I've only seen a double-drive configuration a
few times. And although I did fork over the money for that "breadbox" C64
drive because I got fed up rather fast with the casettes (always had to
verfy the program - on a medium that was already slow - to be sure it would
"stick". And I learned that the hard way. :-( )


I had (and, actually, still have) a MSD SD-2 dual drive. It would often
fail because of the connector on the controller where the transformer
secondary was connected. I finally fixed it (where the repair shop
always failed), but by then I wasn't using the C64 much.

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary; men alone
are quite capable of every wickedness" -- Joseph Conrad
  #25  
Old May 16th 18, 11:51 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Diesel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 937
Default Defragger and SSD defrag ?

"David E. Ross"
news alt.windows7.general, wrote:

On 5/8/2018 12:32 PM, NoonName wrote:

1) what is the best defragger that will handle Win XP with HDD ?

2) does a laptop with a SSD ever need defragging ? When ?


Two actions are really meaningless for SSDs.

As Wieser describes, defragging an SSD will not accomplish
anything. By writing unnecessarily to the SSD, defragging can
actually shorten the useful life of an SSD.

The other action that is meaningless is erasing files. The
writing needed to erase a file might fail to over-write that file.
While the pointer to the file might be erased, the file contents
remain untouched.


That depends on the way in which you opted to delete the file. Using
a secure file wiping utility (if properly written and implemented)
will erase the file contents.

Only a total erasure of the entire device could have any meaning.
Details about this are at http://eraser.heidi.ie/.


It's a site for a secure disk wiping utility. One of many which all
do the same thing. It's not necessary to wipe the entire disk out to
whack selected file(s).




--
To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
================================================== =
Cats must try to kill the curlicues of ribbon on the finished
packages.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.