|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|
A phenomenon I have observed in Windows XP is that when I compact in =
Outlook Express before running Disk Defragmenter then file fragmentation =
is less when Disk Defragmenter analyses the disk.
Hope this helps.
Stourport, Worcs, England
Enquire, plan and execute.
Please tell the newsgroup how any=20
suggested solution worked for you.
"andrea catto'" wrote in message =
I know for a fact if you want to write sector by sector from the =
to end of an hard drive, it may be very fast.
Defrag is very slow indeed.
I am wondering if there is some optimization that can be made to the =
so that data is pre-prepared in memory (just the meta data of course), =
once those pointers are ready, a major one-time-only set of writes =
the problem I think with the slowness of defrag is that it moves =
I know I know, defrag must keep the disk consistent so it can not do a =
time operation otherwise a power failure may screw it all up....
but what do you think ?
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Defrag||Tom||Software & Applications||2||July 10th 04 04:01 PM|
|can't defrag w98se||Murphy||Software & Applications||0||July 2nd 04 08:55 AM|
|Scandisk and Defrag Questions||JR Berry||General||11||June 29th 04 07:28 PM|
|ScanDisk & Defrag problems||anonymous||General||0||June 14th 04 04:50 PM|
|Cannot scandisc and/or defrag, get Fatal Exception in the middle||kulkat||Software & Applications||3||May 17th 04 08:31 AM|