|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Gary's experience was largely mine too. It didn't do the defragging job
(that is, not as complete) as the defragger I routinely use in Win 3.11.
I made three consecutive defrags, and each seemed to improve the result,
although the final result contained significant fragmentation, MUCH
reduced from when I had started, but fragmentation nevertheless. I
wonder if the full version would produce better results.
Gary Fritz wrote:
> > For any Win NT user, Diskeeper Lite sounds well needed and a true
> > bargain.
>
> I also downloaded DK Lite a few days ago, and I'm not quite as
> impressed.
>
> I ran it on my C drive (NTFS) which was fairly heavily fragmented.
> It's 70% full (3GB out of 4.3), so there is 1.3GB free on it, and
> there was a single contiguous 250MB free space on it due to moving my
> VM swap space to the D drive just before running DK Lite.
>
> Any decent defragger I've ever seen would have been able to
> completely defrag this disk and create large free spaces. DKlite had
> plenty of free space to work with, including the large contiguous
> piece. But DK Lite couldn't fully defrag it, even after 7
> consecutive defrags!! Furthermore, the first defrag, instead of
> consolidating fragmented files in the large free space, splattered
> the free space all over the disk and left many fragmented files
> behind.
>
> More troublesome, the information from the program was inconsistent.
> DK Lite has an "Analyze" mode and a "Defrag" mode. Both report the
> number of fragmented files and the number of "excess fragments."
> Here are the results of running many A's and D's:
>
> FragFiles ExcessFrags
> A: 3600 52000 (TS4 database was in 3700 pieces.... :-)
> D: 100 22178
> A: (forgot to record this one)
> D: 100+ 8000
> A: 24 13000
> D: 6 1312
> A: 18 12103
> D: 4 4102
> A: 14 8003
> A: 33 8346 (might have been a defrag between these?)
> D: 2 37
> A: 11 7934
> D: "Can't defrag any further"
> A: 14 7705
> D: 4 109
> A: 10 7596
>
> I did some operations between some of these Defrag/Analyze cycles,
> but not enough to cause that kind of variation. I always analyzed
> immediately after the defrag finished, and the D & A answers were
> always wildly different.
>
> Meanwhile, the graphical display of the disk showed most of the disk
> being fragmented, even after 7 defrag passes!
>
> And on my D drive, the graphic Analysis display showed more used
> (contiguous) files than empty filespace, even though there's only
> 1.9GB used and 6.8GB free on that drive! Then I ran a defrag on D
> and most of the previously "used" space turned magically into "free"
> space!?
>
> For free, it's hard to complain too much. I suspect my disk is in
> much better shape than it was before. The full version offers
> important improvements, like the ability to run a defrag at bootup so
> you can move/consolidate directories. And the DiskKeeper defraggers
> have the VERY nice feature that they can supposedly defrag a file
> even if it's open by another application. (Hence Ullrich's ability
> to run it every night without shutting down TS.)
>
> But I'm leery of buying the full-featured version if the freebie demo
> acts this bizarre.
>
> Gary
|