A few defrag questions

I usually run the XP defrag program every 2-3 months. When I ran it
today, I took a closer look at the report than I have in the past. I
noticed that it reports three fragmentation numbers: total
fragmentation, file fragmentation, and free space fragmentation. How
are these related?

After the analyze (before the defrag), the total fragmentation was 14%
and the file fragmentation was 28%. I don't remember the free space
fragmentation number.

After the defrag, the total fragmentation was 5%, the file
fragmentation was 10%, and the free space fragmentation was 0%.

Is the total fragmentation just the average of the other two?

Is one of these more significant that another (for system
performance)?

What are the threshholds over which defragmentation is recommended?

I see articles about continuous (background) defrag programs. Are
these better than the manual ones?

They claim to keep the disk constantly defragmented. Does this really
matter much?

They claim to save time because I don't have to run the defrag program
and then not used the PC while it is working. Does this matter? I
usually run it when I am not going to be using the machine for awhile,
so there is little inconvenience other than having to do it.

I already have a backup program running in the background (Carbonite).
It claims to only use background time and not interfere with what I am
doing. I haven't noticed any degradation in performance. The machine
is slow at times, but it was before I installed Carbonite. I am just
wondering if I can afford another background process. Tack manager
already shows 2-3 pages of stuff.

If these are wirthwhile, can anyone recommend one that is (a)
effective, (b) reliable, and (c) safe? Cost is not a factor.

Thanks

Replies inline.

Three Lefts wrote:
I usually run the XP defrag program every 2-3 months.

Not often enough if computer is used regularly, although it will depend
to some extent on what you do with your computer. You should ignore the
"Do not need" message.

When I ran it
today, I took a closer look at the report than I have in the past. I
noticed that it reports three fragmentation numbers: total
fragmentation, file fragmentation, and free space fragmentation. How
are these related?

These statistics are really meaningless as the percentages reflect the
total of all data on disk. If you removed all files ready for archiving
the percentages would be much higher than if you retained all files on
disk and never archived. Fragmented files will be those you regularly
access and not those that are archived. Current accessed files are the
files that matter not the statistics. If everday you access user created
data files and these are fragmented then you will see slower
performance. Separating current from archived data files simplifies
defragmentation.


After the analyze (before the defrag), the total fragmentation was 14%
and the file fragmentation was 28%. I don't remember the free space
fragmentation number.

After the defrag, the total fragmentation was 5%, the file
fragmentation was 10%, and the free space fragmentation was 0%.

Is the total fragmentation just the average of the other two?

Is one of these more significant that another (for system
performance)?

What are the threshholds over which defragmentation is recommended?

None. Do it weekly if you use your computer daily and after any
significant system / programme changes.


I see articles about continuous (background) defrag programs. Are
these better than the manual ones?

Waste of money.


They claim to keep the disk constantly defragmented. Does this really
matter much?


Fragmentation is only one of many factors that contribute to poor system
performance. Removal of redundant files using Disk CleanUp or cCleaner
should always be carried out before running Disk Defragmenter. It is the
combination of housekeeping measures that help maintain good system
performance. Compacting Outlook Express and monitoring Event Viewer
Reports are also part of good housekeeping.

They claim to save time because I don't have to run the defrag program
and then not used the PC while it is working. Does this matter? I
usually run it when I am not going to be using the machine for awhile,
so there is little inconvenience other than having to do it.

Running Disk Cleanup and Disk Defragmenter once a week should not take
up much time. It only takes a long time if left for months.


I already have a backup program running in the background (Carbonite).
It claims to only use background time and not interfere with what I am
doing. I haven't noticed any degradation in performance. The machine
is slow at times, but it was before I installed Carbonite. I am just
wondering if I can afford another background process. Tack manager
already shows 2-3 pages of stuff.

How much RAM?

Try Ctrl+Alt+Delete to select Task Manager and click the Performance
Tab. Under Commit Charge what is the Total, the Limit and the Peak?



If these are wirthwhile, can anyone recommend one that is (a)
effective, (b) reliable, and (c) safe? Cost is not a factor.

Thanks


--



Hope this helps.

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

I tried one of the disk defrag programs and found it just a waste of time
and money. It slowed the computer down quite a bit and did not appear to do
a better job.


"Three Lefts" wrote in message
...
I usually run the XP defrag program every 2-3 months. When I ran it
today, I took a closer look at the report than I have in the past. I
noticed that it reports three fragmentation numbers: total
fragmentation, file fragmentation, and free space fragmentation. How
are these related?

After the analyze (before the defrag), the total fragmentation was 14%
and the file fragmentation was 28%. I don't remember the free space
fragmentation number.

After the defrag, the total fragmentation was 5%, the file
fragmentation was 10%, and the free space fragmentation was 0%.

Is the total fragmentation just the average of the other two?

Is one of these more significant that another (for system
performance)?

What are the threshholds over which defragmentation is recommended?

I see articles about continuous (background) defrag programs. Are
these better than the manual ones?

They claim to keep the disk constantly defragmented. Does this really
matter much?

They claim to save time because I don't have to run the defrag program
and then not used the PC while it is working. Does this matter? I
usually run it when I am not going to be using the machine for awhile,
so there is little inconvenience other than having to do it.

I already have a backup program running in the background (Carbonite).
It claims to only use background time and not interfere with what I am
doing. I haven't noticed any degradation in performance. The machine
is slow at times, but it was before I installed Carbonite. I am just
wondering if I can afford another background process. Tack manager
already shows 2-3 pages of stuff.

If these are wirthwhile, can anyone recommend one that is (a)
effective, (b) reliable, and (c) safe? Cost is not a factor.

Thanks

"Three Lefts" wrote in message
...
I usually run the XP defrag program every 2-3 months. When I ran it
today, I took a closer look at the report than I have in the past. I
noticed that it reports three fragmentation numbers: total
fragmentation, file fragmentation, and free space fragmentation. How
are these related?

After the analyze (before the defrag), the total fragmentation was 14%
and the file fragmentation was 28%. I don't remember the free space
fragmentation number.

After the defrag, the total fragmentation was 5%, the file
fragmentation was 10%, and the free space fragmentation was 0%.

Is the total fragmentation just the average of the other two?

Is one of these more significant that another (for system
performance)?

What are the threshholds over which defragmentation is recommended?

I see articles about continuous (background) defrag programs. Are
these better than the manual ones?

They claim to keep the disk constantly defragmented. Does this really
matter much?

They claim to save time because I don't have to run the defrag program
and then not used the PC while it is working. Does this matter? I
usually run it when I am not going to be using the machine for awhile,
so there is little inconvenience other than having to do it.

I already have a backup program running in the background (Carbonite).
It claims to only use background time and not interfere with what I am
doing. I haven't noticed any degradation in performance. The machine
is slow at times, but it was before I installed Carbonite. I am just
wondering if I can afford another background process. Tack manager
already shows 2-3 pages of stuff.

If these are wirthwhile, can anyone recommend one that is (a)
effective, (b) reliable, and (c) safe? Cost is not a factor.

Thanks

If your drive is formatted in NTFS, it doesn't need defragmenting anywhere
near that often. The three defragmentation numbers mean just what they say.

--
Frank Saunders MS-MVP IE,OE/WM
Do not reply with email