Diskeeper 10

[ssb]

Freespace consolidation does not equal improved performance or reduced fragemtation. The NTFS file system by design leaves space for files to grow. Perfectdisk effectively works against the file system

Neither NTFS or any other file system leaves free space holes by design, it is a side effect of random accessing file storage architecture used by all current operating systems.

[Mastertech]

NTFS leaves free space after each file to allow for growth. This has the negative effect of fragmenting free space but in terms of performance it greatly reduces individual file fragmentation until the disk starts to get full. NTFS's design is the reason fragmentation does not effect it as greatly as FAT.

[ps89]

May I know what's the difference between 'Primary Defragmentation Jobs' and 'Secondary Defragmentation Jobs '? Thanks. :)

[Mastertech]

Primary Defragmentation Jobs — Primary Defragmentation Jobs are the core component of Set It and Forget It defragmentation. Establish primary jobs for any volumes you want defragmented on a regular basis.

Secondary Defragmentation Jobs (not available in Diskeeper Home Edition) Secondary Defragmentation Jobs are essentially a second, independent defragmentation job type you can assign to a volume. They have the same, but separate options as Primary Defragmentation Jobs. This allows you to use a Primary Defragmentation Job to set one schedule for weekdays, and a Secondary Defragmentation Job with another schedule on the same volumes for weekends. Or you can run low-priority defragmentation jobs during the day when the computer is active, and another, higher-priority job in the off-hours.

[ssb]

NTFS leaves free space after each file to allow for growth. This has the negative effect of fragmenting free space but in terms of performance it greatly reduces individual file fragmentation until the disk starts to get full. NTFS's design is the reason fragmentation does not effect it as greatly as FAT.

Sorry but that's not true. NTFS has nothing, except MFT, that prevents file or free space fragmentation.

You can read the Microsoft article I've posted before or this one.

[ps89]

Primary Defragmentation Jobs ? Primary Defragmentation Jobs are the core component of Set It and Forget It defragmentation. Establish primary jobs for any volumes you want defragmented on a regular basis.Secondary Defragmentation Jobsb> (not available in Diskeeper Home Edition) Secondary Defragmentation Jobs are essentially a second, independent defragmentation job type you can assign to a volume. They have the same, but separate options as Primary Defragmentation Jobs. This allows you to use a Primary Defragmentation Job to set one schedule for weekdays, and a Secondary Defragmentation Job with another schedule on the same volumes for weekends. Or you can run low-priority defragmentation jobs during the day when the computer is active, and another, higher-priority job in the off-hours.

Got it. Thanks a lot. I'll just use Primary Defragmentation Jobs then:):)

[felixml]

I always rhought that Diskeeper - for an average advanced user - is the fastest and the easiest solution for many years

(using at least for 6 years).

All newly added features are nice, but for most they are unnecessary.

Two major competitors do marginally better job defragging, but are MUCH slower

[Cyber Dog]

Sorry but that's not true. NTFS has nothing, except MFT, that prevents file or free space fragmentation.

You can read the Microsoft article I've posted before or this one.

Stop trying to confuse the issue. Of course, when there are holes in the middle of a file, it can negatively affect performance, and that is the primary issue a defragmenter should correct. Mastertech is correct that free space between separate files allow for file growth without causing excess fragmentation. It's actually a feature designed into many advanced filesystems today.

[ghayes]

Freespace consolidation does not equal improved performance or reduced fragemtation. The NTFS file system by design leaves space for files to grow. Perfectdisk effectively works against the file system.

All the other Defragmenters waste system resources and time constantly consolidating free space by default. Diskeeper is the only program that by default defragments until disk peformance is optimized. You can select Freespace consolidation if you wish, it was also available in v9. Performance in the end is all anyone cares about.

Neither Registry "optimization" or cleaning for that matter effect performance in anyway.

I would also like to back up the fact that Diskeeper running in the background does NOT effect performance. v9 and v10 include I/O smart which will stop the defragmentation engine should you start accessing the HD. I have AV running and have seen no reduced performance in regards to Diskeeper running in the background. I can testify to this with Avast, Computer Associates, Trend Micro and Norton AV. It is possible other AVs may have a problem but that sounds like a problem with the AV.

Actually, one of the original developers of NTFS proved that free space consolidation results in less wasted seeks and improved overall drive performance. Free space consolidation (or lack thereof) is one of the dirty little secrets in the defragmentation world. Most defrag vendors point out the improvements in READ performance that defragmentation provides. The problem is that I don't know of too many Windows systems that are strickly read I/O. There is a lot of write activity going on as well. If you don't consolidate free space, you don't really improve write performance. If you only improve read performance and don't improve write performance, you aren't getting the total tuneup.

What is very interesting is that in the Diskeeper help files, they talk about the importance of free space consolidation and the impact that free space fragmentation makes on write performance. They also state that a defragmenter should consolidate free space. Prior to Diskeeper 7 SE, Diskeeper used to provide statistics on free space fragmentation. Starting with 7 SE, then removed this statistic. Starting with (I believe) Version 8 of Diskeeper, they added an Improved Free Space Consolidation defrag method (with V10, it has been renamed to Complete Defrag). However, you can only run this in a scheduled mode and it takes multiple passes and free space consolidation will be gradual as it is used over time. You may also notice that with Diskeeper V10, they claim that they've made improvements in free space consolidation ability with TVE. So-o-o, they recognize the importance of free space consolidation and recognize that there ARE people who want this ability. They just aren't there yet in terms of ability to do it :)

- Greg/Raxco Software

Microsoft MVP - Windows File Systems

Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.

[lethal0r]

Come on guys, theyre both good ^_^

Do you have to run PD and Diskeeper as services?

I dont want them running all the time, just when i need them. Can anyone advise me here?

[Mastertech]

Actually, one of the original developers of NTFS proved that free space consolidation results in less wasted seeks and improved overall drive performance.

Which developer and where is this documented?

Free space consolidation (or lack thereof) is one of the dirty little secrets in the defragmentation world.

Really? That is why Norton SpeedDisk did it from day one?

Most defrag vendors point out the improvements in READ performance that defragmentation provides. The problem is that I don't know of too many Windows systems that are strickly read I/O. There is a lot of write activity going on as well. If you don't consolidate free space, you don't really improve write performance. If you only improve read performance and don't improve write performance, you aren't getting the total tuneup.

To a point.

What is very interesting is that in the Diskeeper help files, they talk about the importance of free space consolidation and the impact that free space fragmentation makes on write performance.

Oh really that is why it says this is the Diskeeper help file then?

It is important to know that having all of the free space in a single, contiguous piece provides very little (if any) performance benefit. Free space fragmented into hundreds of pieces will impact disk performance, but free space that’s in a few pieces should not have any effect on the performance of your disk.

"Our primary philosophy with Diskeeper is improving and maintaining the performance of your computer. The disk drives are the primary bottleneck in your computer's performance. Diskeeper restores the disks to top speed by eliminating fragmentation.

It is a common misconception that a defragmented disk should look very neat and tidy in the Volume Map tab, with solid blue bars all the way across the screen (representing fragmentation-free files) and the rest white space (representing consolidated space).

Clearly, the speed of the volume (meaning how fast you can access the data on it) is more important than the prettiness of the display or the consolidation of all the free space into one place. Free space consolidation might be important if the next file that you plan to create needs to be one gigantic contiguous file, but it has no effect on performance. In fact, the operating system may or may not write the next file into a contiguous location — even if there is a large enough space.

Because of this, when using the "Quick" or "Recommended" defragmentation methods, Diskeeper uses algorithms that achieve the highest speed from your volumes regardless of the arrangement of the free spaces on the disk and on the screen—and it does so without wasting time on excessive consolidation of free space. We simply go for the fastest possible file access times and then stop.

Even so, you might ask why we don't continue and rearrange the files further to get a neat display? Because it takes computer power to do so. We long ago decided that it would be wrong for Diskeeper to consume more of your computer's performance than it gives back. So Diskeeper defragments until the disk is in top shape performance-wise and then stops.

Now this might not be important to you if you like to sit and watch the display as Diskeeper defragments your drive, but it is a very big deal to large corporate data centers and people who depend on their computers for their work. They need all the performance they can get and can't hold up production while the defragmenter works to enhance the "look" of the disk but not improve its performance. This is why Diskeeper is designed to run in the background at the lowest possible priority, giving way to any other program that needs to run. And it is also why Diskeeper stops defragmenting when maximum performance has been achieved.

Of course, for those who want to expend the additional computer resources, the "Comprehensive" defragmentation method is also available. This defragmentation method performs additional processing to further consolidate the free space on your volumes."

They also state that a defragmenter should consolidate free space.

Diskeeper does to a point, where performance is effected then stops but if you want to max free space it allows you to.

Prior to Diskeeper 7 SE, Diskeeper used to provide statistics on free space fragmentation. Starting with 7 SE, then removed this statistic. Starting with (I believe) Version 8 of Diskeeper, they added an Improved Free Space Consolidation defrag method (with V10, it has been renamed to Complete Defrag). However, you can only run this in a scheduled mode and it takes multiple passes and free space consolidation will be gradual as it is used over time. You may also notice that with Diskeeper V10, they claim that they've made improvements in free space consolidation ability with TVE. So-o-o, they recognize the importance of free space consolidation and recognize that there ARE people who want this ability. They just aren't there yet in terms of ability to do it.

Simply because Diskeeper is concerned with optimizing performance with the least amount of processing. It makes sense and works. I've never seen any improved performance from all the extra time spent consolidating free space. Edited December 13, 2005 by Mastertech

[ssb]

Stop trying to confuse the issue. Of course, when there are holes in the middle of a file, it can negatively affect performance, and that is the primary issue a defragmenter should correct. Mastertech is correct that free space between separate files allow for file growth without causing excess fragmentation. It's actually a feature designed into many advanced filesystems today.

First, I don't try to confuse the issue. I only posted two technical articles which prove some facts about NTFS architecture.

Second, can you tell me how an executable, a dll or other file located in "Program Files" folder can grow in size? All defragmenters, including PD and DK, use files and folder defragment exclusion lists where you can set directories that keep growing in size or change frequently (eg "My Documents" and others).

Edited December 13, 2005 by ssb

[Mastertech]

Patching or overwriting a file can change a .exe or .dlls size.

[ssb]

Patching or overwriting a file can change a .exe or .dlls size.

Come on Mastertech, you know that is not the case. :p

[Mastertech]

When you overwrite a file or patch it the size changes.

[ssb]

When you overwrite a file or patch it the size changes.

How often do you overwrite or patch such files? I'm sure you defrag your disks more regularly.

[Mastertech]

I update and patch applications as soon as the update or patch is available. Depending on the application that can vary from every week to every few months.

[xpgeek]

Or what about a game patch as an example. A big PC game patch, like say 280mb 1.12 patch for BF2, updates and changes LOTS of already installed files.

[ssb]

I update and patch applications as soon as the update or patch is available. Depending on the application that can vary from every week to every few months.

I'm sure you defrag your disk more regularly, or not ;)

BTW how Diskeeper helps in that case ?

Or what about a game patch as an example. A big PC game patch, like say 280mb 1.12 patch for BF2, updates and changes LOTS of already installed files.

Yeah, what about an OS update, or a disk format? :p

[Mastertech]

Diskeeper helps for other situations where large files are split up ect...

[ghayes]

Which developer and where is this documented?

http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2..._WhitePaper.pdf

Oh really that is why it says this is the Diskeeper help file then?

Also found in the Diskeeper help file:

As used in reference to Windows operating systems, disk fragmentation means two things:

- a condition in which pieces of individual files on a volume are not contiguous, but rather are broken up and scattered around the volume; and

- a condition in which the free space on a volume consists of little pieces of space here and there rather than a few large free spaces.

The effects of excessive fragmentation are twofold as well:

- file access takes longer because a file must be collected in pieces here and there, requiring several disk accesses instead of just one; and

- file creations take longer because space for the file must be allocated in little pieces here and there instead of just one contiguous allocation.

Before the introduction of Diskeeper, there was no method for completely correcting the problems of file and free space fragmentation on Windows NT computers or in a mixed Windows network.

In designing Diskeeper, the following goals were established:

- The product must be completely safe to use.

- It must improve Windows system performance. It is not designed to make the disk look "pretty" ? it is designed to improve disk performance and, as a result, overall system performance.

- It should process live disks without interfering with user access to files.

- It should run without operator intervention.

It must defragment all possible files and consolidate free space into the smallest possible number of large spacesb>.i>

"Our primary philosophy with Diskeeper is improving and maintaining the performance of your computer. The disk drives are the primary bottleneck in your computer's performance. Diskeeper restores the disks to top speed by eliminating fragmentation.

If you don't perform free space consolidation, you can't get optimal write performance - meaning that the drive doesn't actually perform at top speed.

We simply go for the fastest possible file access times and then stop.

Meaning they concentrate on improving read performance - not on write performance.

So Diskeeper defragments until the disk is in top shape performance-wise and then stops.

Top shape performance-wise includes both read and write performance - not just read performance.

-----------------------------

See what I mean. They certainly can't seem to make up their minds on whether free space consolidation is important or no:):)

Diskeeper does to a point, where performance is effected then stops but if you want to max free space it allows you to.

Yes, they allow you to do so using the Comprehensive Defrag method. But, free space consolidation is gradual as it is used over time - how many times will you have to run it to consolidate free space? If you've only scheduled it to run once a week and free space consolidation is gradual as each scheduled pass is run, how is this effective? Between defrag passes, there are files being written - and being written fragmented and slowly.

- Greg/Raxco Software

Microsoft MVP - Windows File Systems

Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.

Mastertech is correct that free space between separate files allow for file growth without causing excess fragmentation.

NTFS includes this ability. It is what is known as an Alloc>Actual file. This means that the end-of-file and end-of-data pointers are different (normally, the pointers are the same). NTFS automatically detects files that it thinks are going to "grow" and will allocate more space for these file than it actually currently takes. When you defragment a file, the file system (which actually performs all defragmentation) automatically preserves the Alloc>Actual properties.

- Greg/Raxco Software

Microsoft MVP - Windows File Systems

Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.

[d4t4b0mb]

Too funny. We've got an argument between an employee of Raxco Software and a person with nice big purchase links for Diskeeper plastered all over his home page.

Who to believe, who to believe...

[ghayes]

Too funny. We've got an argument between an employee of Raxco Software and a person with nice big purchase links for Diskeeper plastered all over his home page.

Who to believe, who to believe...

Aside from the fact that I've disclosed up front who I work for, I happen to be one of only a handful of Microsoft MVPs for Windows File Systems. I know quite a bit more than the average person about Windows file systems, how they work and are supposed to work. I also happen to know entirely way too much about fragmentation - athough I am able to refrain from talking about it at parties :)

[d4t4b0mb]

Fair enough. I could care less really since PerfectDisk is suiting me just fine right now, and I'm not going to be swayed by people blathering in a forum. I tried diskeeper 10, found it to be cludge, so I switched.

[xpgeek]

I'll admit I was a longtime Diskeeper user, recently decided to give PerfectDisk a decent try after reading this thread and one other, and I have chosen to remain with PerfectDisk as my preferred defragger.

Without the 'aggressive free space consolidation' enabled its just a little slower then Diskeeper, and I don't feel I really need THAT much free space consolidation, and I like the fact that it actually does some amount of free space consolidation without having to set a schedule as the only way to do it like in Diskeeper.

And I like its smart placement more then Diskeeper's new I-Faast feature. I tried Diskeeper's I-Faast feature, made it run twice, and found it moved a bunch of files to the very end of the drive, which kind of puzzled me. I could be wrong, but isn't the I-Faast thing supposed to make those files faster, then why is it putting them all way over there on the end of the drive where the drive head has to move to the outer edge of the disk to reach them, correct me if I'm wrong but that seems like it would actually make them slower.

And besides those two things I just feel that PerfectDisk is just doing a much better job, a more thorough defrag. I'm now a PerfectDisk user for good.