Jump to content
IObit Forum
Top Free Driver Updater Tools Best 25 PC Optimization Software Best 22 Antimalware Best 22 Uninstaller Software IObit Coupons & Discount Offers PC Optimizer Mac Boost Advice IObit Coupons A Good Utility Program From IObit IObit Promo Codes IObit Coupon Codes IObit Coupons and Deals FAQs Driver Booster Pro Review

Definition for "Fast" and "Fully" optimize


Recommended Posts

I do not think IObit has ever posted exactly what the differences Are,

but the algorithm is the same,

fast and full optimize moves more data, so it takes more time.

 

I think Full-optimize fills more unused-space on drive, than fast,

but I'm not even sure about that?

 

My guess is that the programmers presently working at IObit are Not even Sure, anymore? :lol:

(Hey it Works, so 'Why Mess with it'!) :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Robert Peters

I am rather sure that we will never get a full detailed explanation - what would we use it for anyway. :-)

Defrag only must mean that the program just places the fragments that are located elsewhere on the disk with the rest of the file it comes from, I think.

Defrag&fast optimize does the same + that it has some few parameters (at least fewer than fully optimize) that selects where to place the program/file/fragment on the disk according to its parameters (could be date accessed or number of times accessed or some other "relevant" parameter). Should make the access time after defragment a bit faster because it takes advantage of the fact that the outer rim of the disk moves much faster then the inner rim and that the outer one third of the disks radius can hold the same amount of data as the rest of the disk (inner two thirds).

Hard to measure with the human senses in a normal situation I think.

 

Fully optimize must have more parameters some of which are intended to keep more files from getting fragmented during your normal operation, I think.

Very difficult for a normal user to verify. But you may sense it over time perhaps.

 

Cheers

solbjerg

 

What is the difference between "defrag only", "defrag & fast optimize", and "defrag & fully optimize"? I can't find that defined anywhere. Thanks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definition for Fast and Fully Optomize

 

Good question and good discussion.

I would like to give my two cents worth, based on what I have observed while using SD. Hope it contributes to the discussion.

 

I think the fast defrag is simply a case of rearranging the files in order to make them contiguous, without any consideration of their position on the drive.

 

Fast optimize will make the files contiguous, and also assess the position based on most used being placed in a position which will allow head access with the minimum amount of scanning head travel.

 

Fully optomize, will do the same, but will also consider, the priority level of the file, such as start up files versus simple data files, and will place the higher priority files at the position which will allow immediate scanning by the head, without the need for the head to travel across the drive.

 

I hope I have explained my thinking properly. But it would be nice to hear Iobits explanation of the logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope I have explained my thinking properly.

 

I agree that is probably way it SHOULD be,

but I do Not think that is the way it Really is.:grin:

 

But it would be nice to hear Iobits explanation of the logic.

 

Yes IObit, I Promise I Won't Laugh, if you tell us 'What it Really Does'. :mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Toppack

I advocate studying the analyze report.

Sort it after what column you want to see

One thing you immidiately see is that very many fragments - by me right now more than 50% - comes from restore files and antivirus scans.

These apparently have been dropped all over the place by the reading heads.

The vast majority of fragments are less than 100 kB, very many in the couple of kB bracket.

Keep in mind also that each coloured square usually represents hundreds of mB or more in the really large harddisks depiction.

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

I agree that is probably way it SHOULD be,

but I do Not think that is the way it Really is.:grin:

 

 

 

Yes IObit, I Promise I Won't Laugh, if you tell us 'What it Really Does'. :mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...