• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Windows defrag and file placement. What are you using?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

nahmus

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Location
Sailing the Azure seas
Hi all,
A friend of mine sent me a link to a defrag program called ultimate defrag. At first i did not think much of it, just another disk program. I started reading it and it offers file placement on the drive.

I used to do alot of veritas management on raid arrays. I would tweak file placement on the platters for maximum throughput. It could make a difference if you put busy files on the outter edges of the platter and the stadic ones in towards the inside.

Are any of you using a program that you like that offers this type of functionality?

suggestions and experiences would be appreciated.


thanks all!
 
Not sure but I thought the fastest file access would be obtained by placing the most used files near the Center of the disk. That way the head would have less TOTAL distance to travel moving between files.
Also don't know if the head gets "parked" at an edge while waiting to access. If this is the case then maybe edge placement might be better..

I only use XP defrag. I was planning on checking if something else is better..
 
O&O Defrag Pro is one of the few programs I've become obsessed over. It doesn't work in vista (yet) and it's one of the few things still holding me back from upgrading.

It uses minimal resources when running in stealth mode, has a normal defragging feature, and allows you to rearrange your drives automatically by last file access, name (ie if you have a drive full of music it makes sorting through it much faster), or last-modified. You can scan multiple drives at once, but only one partition per drive at a time. Compared to the basic XP defragger and even Diskeeper it's amazing.
 
TBH!


When I got past the 9X minset. Found out NT did (dud) well in how it acted under nornal user usage.
I 'd'frag'ed like crazy every week.

Then I found out....


It handles itself well.


Please don't bite into the 'frag apps spew. I admit!! It does frag a bit sometimes it needs to be fixed.

IF you install a large file(game or app) then get it right. Otherwise it should handle itself fine. Ask any linux user about defrag?


Most the apps make it seem like you 'have to use' their app all the time. Use whatever you use or think is the fastest after a large file is inserted, I usually do every 5 gigs of transfer. If it is inter-disk. Then I have no worries. Extra-disk, then I give it a little love to make sure my speeds are not down the mill a second. Since not all files will be slow...

I just moved over to DK10. Since it was free to me. DK8 worked great for the longest time.
 
RTP said:
Not sure but I thought the fastest file access would be obtained by placing the most used files near the Center of the disk. That way the head would have less TOTAL distance to travel moving between files.
Also don't know if the head gets "parked" at an edge while waiting to access. If this is the case then maybe edge placement might be better..

I only use XP defrag. I was planning on checking if something else is better..

I actually used the wrong terminology. You will get faster throughput if you move files to the outer edges of a disk since it spins faster than the inside (think of a record on a recordplayer) If you put the most used files onto the outer edge you will increase your throughput.

I've only ever used XP defrag on my home system and haven't really played with veritas in about 2 years. this was the first program that i've seen that offers that functionality for under 40.00. I don't follow the windows defrag/disk optimization world all that closley and did not know what was out there.

for 40.00 i might just give it a shot and tinker around with it. (with a full image beforehand of course :D )

maybe I'll post up some benchies. what you you all recomend to benchmark this with. I figure windows load time would be a good bench. maybe seqential file read???
 
nahmus said:
I actually used the wrong terminology. You will get faster throughput if you move files to the outer edges of a disk since it spins faster than the inside (think of a record on a recordplayer) If you put the most used files onto the outer edge you will increase your throughput.
Oh yes, thanks, I forgot about the higher velocity at the outer edge for data reads... I was only thinking of head access time.
Also the outer edge track would be longer to hold more data/track.. so I guess the head would not need to move as much for the same data.
So then is the head movement time insignificant as compared to the data read?
.. maybe head access time might be more significant for a large number of small files..
 
Last edited:
sorry to take so long to post the results. In a nutshel there was no difference. I guess theres not enough useage of the drive to make the small increases worth the effort. Here are the results

Before testing with ATTO
atto-before.jpg

After defrag testing with ATTO
atto-after.jpg

Before defrag testing with HD-Tach
hdtach-before.jpg

After defrag testing with HD-Tach
after-hdtech.jpg
 
Enablingwolf said:
TBH!


When I got past the 9X minset. Found out NT did (dud) well in how it acted under nornal user usage.
I 'd'frag'ed like crazy every week.

Then I found out....


It handles itself well.


Please don't bite into the 'frag apps spew. I admit!! It does frag a bit sometimes it needs to be fixed.

IF you install a large file(game or app) then get it right. Otherwise it should handle itself fine. Ask any linux user about defrag?


Most the apps make it seem like you 'have to use' their app all the time. Use whatever you use or think is the fastest after a large file is inserted, I usually do every 5 gigs of transfer. If it is inter-disk. Then I have no worries. Extra-disk, then I give it a little love to make sure my speeds are not down the mill a second. Since not all files will be slow...

I just moved over to DK10. Since it was free to me. DK8 worked great for the longest time.
QFT
 
Back