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

Optimization doesn't move all files


Recommended Posts

I've used Smart DeFrag 2 and have selected Defragment and Fully Optimize on my system. While the final results seem resonable, why (with full optimization) does the program leave "frequently used" files scattered across the drive? Some blocks are showing up within the "free space" area of the display and others are scattered within the "rarely used" space. Certainly most of the frequently used blocks are contiguous on the chart but why aren't ALL of them moved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi djweigel

Do you mind showing us a screenshot in order to understand better?

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

I've used Smart DeFrag 2 and have selected Defragment and Fully Optimize on my system. While the final results seem resonable, why (with full optimization) does the program leave "frequently used" files scattered across the drive? Some blocks are showing up within the "free space" area of the display and others are scattered within the "rarely used" space. Certainly most of the frequently used blocks are contiguous on the chart but why aren't ALL of them moved?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

aren't ALL of them moved?

 

 

No, to optimize in that way would take Many Hours to complete a very fragmented drive ,

with modern large-size drives, that are full of data.

The few Microseconds gained, with modern fast drives, is not worth the very extended defragmentation time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct... thanks Toppack!

 

No, to optimize in that way would take Many Hours to complete a very fragmented drive ,

with modern large-size drives, that are full of data.

The few Microseconds gained, with modern fast drives, is not worth the very extended defragmentation time.

 

Here is the machine (copied from user CP):

<table class="tborder" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="1" align="center" height="152" width="507"><tbody><tr valign="top"><td class="panelsurround" align="center">

<dl id="additionalinfo_list"><dt class="smallfont">OS + Computer Details:</dt><dd class="smallfont">XP Pro SP3; Norton 360; MalwareBytes; SmartDefrag 2 (version 2.7) (free); Gygabyte motherboard EP45-DS3R, Intel 2.8Ghz CPU; 4GB RAM; NVIDIA GeForce 9800GT graphic card; Seagate ST3500418AS, 500GB (353GB free)</dd></dl>

 

</td> <td class="panelsurround" align="center">

djweigel is not a member of any public groups

 

 

 

</td> </tr> </tbody></table> Oops got the whole text box... cannot resize, sorry.

 

 

500GB (353GB free)
You have plenty of space... don't be obsessive!

 

Sincerely,

-Mel

Live long and prosper!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In SD general settings, have you ticked the box for:

Skip files larger than 2 GB

 

If so this may be the reason for your result. However, the most likely reason is as Toppack said....it was a fast optimise and the few Microseconds gained, with modern fast drives, is not worth the very extended defragmentation time.

A Full Optimise would probably have moved them all.

 

Also. please note that your SD report attachment is not clear enough and cannot be read. Please supply clearer image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi djweigel

Unfortunately the screenshots are a bit too unclear to read, but it looks as if the report only reports 1 fragment? What it is is unreadable.

The group of red squares suggests as Scannan says that you have a setting that do not defrag files over a certain chosen size? This can be changed in the settings - I always run the program with that option unchecked..

Do you have many large files - pictures/sound/videoes on your machine?

It seems like your screenshot shows that you see between 3000-5000 squares in the window - if it is a harddisk with the size of 1TB (10^12) it will mean that each square represents about 200 MB - probably much more than a cluster or a sector. Just a few KB of fragments in a square will probably mean that it will be shown as red.

A precise depiction of your disc would probably need millions of squares to be shown which would be very unpractical.

If every allocation unit would have to be shown - probably billions of squares (in the near future) :-)

Cheers

solbjerg

p.s. there are usually 4 KB in each allocation unit (in the NTFS - New Technology File System) which should mean that there will be around 244 Million of them in a 1 TB (terrabyte) disc (if the terrabyte is 10^12 bytes - if it is a true 1 TB (1099511627776) there will be 250 Million of them.

 

 

[ATTACH]11071[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]11072[/ATTACH]

 

Attached are the Defragmented Screen and the Defragment Report

Thanks for the response.

DJWeigel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...