If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Defrag before install a good idea?
Quick questions for you all,
How many of you take the time and trouble to defragment before a major install like FS? Have you ever tried deactivating virtual memory, defragging, then re-enabling virtual memory? (To un-frag the swapfile, in effect) Ever had any problems specifying a fixed-size swapfile, to stop it from becoming fragmented? -- regards, Mark |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark Cherry" wrote in message
... Speed Tips/Speed up software are the new Snake Oil industry. Speed Tips? Is this what its called in XP? (I'm still in '98 land until next week) He's referring to general advice that's intended to speed up your computer. There's no "speed tips" feature in Windows XP. One thing that I've never seen mentioned and would like to see *strongly* emphasized is that, if you live in an area where power cuts are commonplace, then you would be better off not defragging at all. Actually, you would be better off spending $50-100 on an uninterruptable power supply. Beyond that, while a FAT file system is *very* susceptible to interruptions during defragmentation, Windows XP allows you to use NTFS which is somewhat more robust. Corruption is still a possibility, but much less likely. Of course, the UPS will remove that concern anyway, and should be considered a *must* if you are at all concerned about data corruption, whether or not you ever run a defragmentation utility. [...] The new system I'm getting will have a 200Gb drive in it which, as you say, will be inherently faster. The defrag exercise itself could be a tedious and time consuming business, relative to the 8Gb unit I have at the moment but the CPU will be nearly 8 times faster, so I suppose it'll balance out and take as long as I'm used to. Actually, the CPU will have very little effect on defragmentation times. However, it is true that the 200Gb hard drive will be faster. Both because it's likely to be a faster RPM drive, and also because the data density on the drive is higher (so more data transferred per rotation). In any case, defragmentation has always been a time-consuming process, especially as the data on the drive reaches nears full capacity of the drive in size. It shouldn't be tedious, since once started you can let the defragmentation utility run on its own. It's not like you have to sit there and monitor the movement of every single disk sector. The perceived advantage is that, if the swapfile is kept at a constant size, the same disk sectors get used for it all the time. Files either side of it can come and go and defragging leaves it in position. When Windows manages it, it changes size all the time and that sometimes means that, when it needs to expand, bits of it are written into the gaps left by files which have been deleted. "Perceived" is the right word here. In fact, just because you allow Windows to manage the swap file, that doesn't mean that it's constantly increasing and decreasing the swap file's size. That would just be plain dumb, and whatever you think about Windows, the folks who wrote the virtual memory subsystem just aren't that dumb. You can see for yourself. Set the virtual memory settings to allow Windows to manage the swap file. Run the computer that way for some period of time. Then boot your favorite defragmentation utility and have it tell you how many fragments the swap file is in. The number of fragments will be small, or possibly even just one. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Good plans-built Light Sport Aircraft | Rob Schneider | Home Built | 15 | August 19th 04 05:50 PM |
Free Volksplane to good home, located in Chino Hills CA | Bryan Zinn | Home Built | 3 | July 18th 04 02:55 AM |
Engine update, good and bad news | nauga | Home Built | 3 | June 25th 04 06:26 PM |
bulding a kitplane maybe Van's RV9A --- a good idea ????? | Flightdeck | Home Built | 10 | September 9th 03 07:20 PM |
Good Source For PIREPS? | Phoenix Pilot | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | August 25th 03 03:59 AM |