Questions about defraggers--and the iobit one.

[Osage]

For some years now I have been using Dklite as a defragger--pro are faster than the windows one---and free--with a somewhat annoying popup warning when fragments reach some level above about 500. Cons are that it does not defrag in the background in the free version---nor is it willing to unfragment free space--which would involve moving system files.

 

I have since tried other defraggers---but found nothing that was a keeper

until iobit---and even after unchecking stop defragging when cpu use gets over 20%, I note that iobit background defragging can't seem to keep up with fragments---on one hand that may be a good thing---a mere few thousand fragments probably won't impact disc performance---but a neglegent or defragging ignorant user with a few hundred thousand fragments would start to see significant system performance loss.---but lest any think I know what I am talking about--this I am just guessing from the little sense I can make about what I have read on defragmenting. So I do ask those more expert than me--at what point does system fragmenting or defragmenting lack thereof become measurable in overall computer performance loss?

 

My other understanding is that only a dos based degragmenter can start to move system files to more compact areas---and is having large blanks spaces on a drive to store big files--that would seem to be a desirable features for a user who may deal with large file sets that may be temporary in nature---or does it matter? And are there any plans to add a dos based scanner to iobits bag of tricks?

 

And the hyperfetch technology seems of interest---but I do hope that questions are asked and answered on this forum regarding various defragging solutions and strategies so I and other can fill in knowledge gaps.

 

But as I said---iobit is defintely a keeper. The promise that it will get better very soon is even more compelling. :D

[Stef]

Hi Osage

Like you I am a relatively new user of SmartDefrag. I have not seen any other replies to your post, so I will have a go

 

I am not sure I have understood what you meant by "nd even after unchecking stop defragging when cpu use gets over 20%, I note that iobit background defragging can't seem to keep up with fragments---on one hand that may be a good thing---a mere few thousand fragments probably won't impact disc performance---but a neglegent or defragging ignorant user with a few hundred thousand fragments would start to see significant system performance loss" :)

 

If I have got it, the ability for SmartDefrag to be scheduled to run when the user is away from their machine would seem to be an answer. I ran it on a *very* fragmented PC disk as part of my "getting to know you" - you are correct, doing a thorough job took some time, but consolidated a bunch of free space. Having this chugging away in the background did not seem to be a problem for the users whose machine I tried it on - I simply told them to let it chug along. It did not intrude on any active work they were doing, with what seems to be a fair share of prioritisation of resources.

 

I do not know what the impact would be if you set the execution priority lower in Windows to address your concern - maybe someone from Iobit can comment on whether that is OK/desirable/a no-no

 

As to working on system files - running in safe mode would seem to be a step in that direction for some locked files...

 

Like you, looking forward to the new release :)

[Osage]

Thank you stef for a reply. I am looking forward to a new release that will show more of what this can do. Nor am I shy about asking tough questions.

I do hope some one more far more expert than me can give some good answers about this fine program.

[samr]

read " a new fix and it works"

 

Regarding your questions about unchecking "stop defrag if CPU is over 20%" or raising the percentage, you might read replies on the topic "a new fix and it works".

samr

[samr]

defrag in safe mode?

 

This is a question for Tim-

Stef raised a good point- will smart defrag run in safe mode and if so, is it a good idea to use this defragger in safe mode?

Also, is it a good idea to check the setting to auto defrag system directories?

I would really like to know the answer for both these questions.

Thanks, samr

[Kailasa108]

defragger philosophy

 

Hi everyone,

I'd like to throw my two cents worth in here. I've been testing SmartDefrag for a few months. It's a good program with the potential for being the best defragger around.

I've spent the last few months testing all of the defrag programs available. IMHO, Diskeeper Lite is just a marketing tool for DK to sell the full program! I help people buy computers. A lot of them are coming with DKLite installed. As part of setup I remove it and give them Vopt 8.1 instead. It's a MUCH better program without all of the advertising. Check it out.

Anyway, there are mainly two approaches to defragging - one is the "Put-all-the-pieces-together-and-shove-them-to-the-"front"-of-the-drive-approach". This is old technology. It's what DK uses (at least up to version 10). DK wrote the original defragger that Windows uses. The problem with this approach is that files don't stay defragged very long if they are used regularly, especially if the free space on the drive is fragmented as well.

New technology defraggers use optimization. They "put-all-the pieces-together", but then over a period of time keep track of which files are modified on an ongoing basis and which are not. These defraggers then optimize the drive by putting the frequently modified files together AND buffering them with free space so that they have "room to grow" and be modified without being fragmented again. These optimizing defraggers also usually put the system files in a separate area too, for the same reason. Perfect Disk by Raxco uses this new technology. It's the best defragger I have found so far, and also has a "screensaver" setting, so it executes when the computer is idle. But it does not have the on-the fly defragging that SmartDefrag does.

Interesting thing is, the old technology defraggers will tell you your drive is still fragmented if you use a new technology defragger on it - because the files are not all pushed up to the "front" of the drive.

As far as system files go - I have found that defragging these files really has the most impact on system performance - other than keeping program files defragged. Problem is, NO defragger can defrag system files while they are in use. So, even if you boot into safe mode, those files will be locked by Windows and will not be accessible. You can only defrag these files (and it is VERY beneficial to do so!) with a boot-time defrag which happens before Windows fully executes. Perfect Disk has this capability for either a one time run or an every bootup run. It looks like that same is planned for SmartDefrag!

So, to me the "winner" of the defragger world will be the program that uses the new technology of file optimization WITH on-the-fly file defragging. Will that be SmartDefrag or Perfect Disk??? Only The Shadow knows.... :wink:

BTW, IObit guy, could you folks put some detailed documentation in this forum about the program please. It would be nice/helpful to know how SmartDefrag works. (Enquiring minds want to know!!!) Thank you.

[samr]

Hi kailasa108,

It will be interesting to see what happens when Iobit implements the off-line defrag of system files, paging files & registry. That will be a major improvement.

 

samr.

[Stef]

Great post Kailasa108 - it sums up my experience very well.

 

Thank you

stef

[Daan94]

Yes, it is a great post, thank you! :lol:

[Newton]

Hi kailasa108,

It will be interesting to see what happens when Iobit implements the off-line defrag of system files, paging files & registry. That will be a major improvement.

 

samr.

Yeah! As you says,i have known how to implement pagefile and registry defrag,but i need time,need your surpport.

Please wait ,i think the functions will come not far