thm
-
Posts
43 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by thm
-
-
I tried JkDefrag.
After installing AVG said: JkDefragGUI.exe is infected.
Worm/Autoit.AIG
I ran the defrag file.
The picture looks like this.
@Six-pack...
JkDefragGUI is written by Emiel Wieldraaijer ( http://www.emro.nl/freeware ) using AutoIt
( http://www.autoitscript.com ), and unfortunately, some virus writers have used this to
produce their malware, so sometimes false positives are produced by virus scanners. You
could try submitting the file to VirusTotal ( http://www.virustotal.com ) to see if other antivirus
tools find anything. The chances are that if less than 2 or 3 out of 32 tools identify anything
they are probably false positives.
The actual defragging is effected by Jeroen Kessels' JkDefrag, and whilst this is an excellent
defragger, it's display is rather poor compared to Defraggler (for example), as you no doubt
have noted when you posted an image of it.
This is available directly from Jeroen's own site: http://www.kessels.com/JkDefrag/
When you first run JkDefragGUI, it should download and install a copy of JkDefrag, but I note
that your version of JkDefrag appears to be version 3.26. This is a bit odd, as that is very
old - version 3.34 was released on 01/02/2008, so maybe you have a rogue version ?
- thm
-
FWIW...
I tend to hammer systems by making repeated edits of large files so my drives become fragmented very quickly, and I've been looking for a decent defragger for some years. The MS-supplied defragmenter is pretty well useless, IMHO.
I used Defraggler on a 136G NTFS drive under XP PRO SP2 to defrag all the files it reported as fragmented the first time and then analyzed using Disk Defragmenter, which kept showing a report of fragmented files that turned out to be folders (and Disk Defragmenter doesn't even try to defragment those).
I gave Defraggler the folder names and it defragmented them very rapidly. I followed up with another Disk Defragmenter analysis, and the "files" no longer showed up as fragmented. A few rounds of that and I ended up with a drive that even Disk Defragmenter reported as unfragmented (although the free space was fragmented).
Done in a fraction of the time that Disk Defragmenter takes.
I've also tried Diskeeper, Norton Systemworks (back in 2000 Norton's product was good, but it's been adulterated since then), O and O Defrag Pro, and PerfectDisk, and Defraggler comes out best in my estimation.
Personally, I don't care if the free space is fragmented - I'm not so much a perfectionist that I want my drives pristine at all times
So my only niggle is that the default Analysis only seems to check for fragmented files; if it also highlighted fragmented folders as well (so that I didn't have to explicitly go looking for those with another tool), or alternatively gave a choice to defrag the entire drive including folders plus/minus free space, I'd be a very happy camper
There are very few pieces of software that impress me, but Defraggler is now part of that select group.
Best,
Peter
Peter: I think you'll find that if you use Action/Defrag Folder... and then select as the folder
the drive that you want to defrag, you will get [at least partially] what you want: it will defrag
all the files and folders [that it can], but not defrag the freespace.
I also believe that Action/Defrag Drive (or effectively the same via the context menu) will
defrag files, folders and the freespace. Take your point re Analysis, though !
-
There can be many reasons why "some files cannot be defragmented",
here are a few thoughts on the matter; I hope that you find them of help...
In any one attempt at defragging a drive in a reasonable period of time, the algorithms
are likely to be fairly simple and move as little data as possible. At the end of this, there
may be no contiguous free spaces large enough to accommodate some of the larger fragmented
files, hence they could not be defragmented without moving other files out of the way first,
and the algorithms probably wouldn't do that if those files had already been defragmented or
moved, as it could be relatively easy to get into a endless circle of moving files around and
getting nowhere and wasting time into the bargain.
You may find that running a defrag a second or third time can resolve most of these, as Defraggler
can get a "fresh look" at the files in their new locations.
Doing things this way typically results in a good compromise between speed and completeness
of defragging. In practice you are unlikely to be able to measure (let alone notice) any
significant difference between a drive with a few fragmented files and one with none.
[And, of course, as soon as you fire up your browser and start browsing the internet you will
generate dozens or hundreds of fragmented files per hour (albeit, rather small ones) !]
As far as I can tell, if you effect a defrag of files after an analysis [i.e. by selecting them
and clicking the "Defrag" button": method A] the defragmentation is of the files only: no
attempt is made to consolidate [defrag] the free space. This is very good for a quick regular
defrag (say, once a day), but it is more likely (as indicated above) that some files won't be
defragmented. This is unlikely to be of significance, at least in the short term.
For a more comprehensive defrag (say once a week or month), you can defrag the files
and consolidate the freespace by right-clicking on the drive name in the Defraggler
window and selecting "Defrag Drive" [method B]. This will typically take much longer, as
it will first defrag the files and then try to defrag [most of] the freespace by moving many files
to the beginning of the drive. In so doing, this will make more contiguous space available
for large files to be accomodated without fragmentation. So, if you have any fragmented
files remaining after the first "comprehensive" defrag you will have a much better chance
of getting such files defragmented on a second or third attempt, and if there are only a
few such files, you will probably be able to defrag just these files quite quickly by using
method A for second/subsequent defrags, but if this fails you can use method B again.
Aside:-
Now, there *are* defragging programs out there that can pretty well guarantee todefrag all files [if there is enough freespace] in "one go", but these are commercialand when running in this mode can take an inordinate amount of time to complete.Personally, I find that the better freeware defraggers [like Defraggler] are very fastand effective if used regularly. When I really do [rarely] want to virtually guarantee totaldefragmentation & optimisation on a drive, then I use the command line version of JkDefragin a script (invoked several times) and set it going [with auto-shutdown afterwards] on myPC before going home. Piriform have indicated that they may include command line supportin Defraggler, and if they do so, I may well switch to using that for this purpose.Another reason that some files cannot be defragmented could be due to limitations of
either the program or the way in which it interworks with Windows. Windows imposes
restrictions on defragging certain system files and components of the MFT, and files
that are open. Indeed, some of these *cannot* be defragmented by any defrag programs
whilst Windows proper is running, but can only be defragmented at boot time [although
there is a further method for the Pagefile].
If you need to defrag files that are locked when Windows is running, then you could
use JkDefrag. If you want to defrag your Pagefile and other system files, then you
could use Pagedfrg (by Sysinternals). Alternatively, you could defrag your Pagefile
on Windows XP IF YOU HAVE ENOUGH RAM (> 512MB) by the following...
1) Remove the Pagefile
2) Reboot the PC
3) Defrag the boot drive [or drive where you want the Pagefile] using Defraggler method B
4) Recreate a Pagefile on your chosen drive, using a custom size with the SAME min/max values.
I have deliberately not been too explicit as to how to do this: if you are not confident
that you would know what to do from the above instuctions then it is probably best
that you don't try it !
Finally, please note that there is a bug in Defraggler up to and including beta 058
whereby if you run an analysis on a drive that has just been defragged using method A
it may report that there are some fragmented files when in fact there are not. Sometimes
a further "analysis" run will indeed correctly show that all [or most] files have indeed been
defragged, but sometimes you would have to restart Defraggler in order to get the correct
analysis.
Happily, although this is a trivial bug, Piriform have tracked this down and fixed it, but
the fixed version has not yet been released. I presume that this will be due to the
wisdom of rolling this fix up with other bug fixes & new features and applying reasonably
thorough testing of the whole before release. [i look forward to it
] -
...Actually, I find that Defraggler is one of the fastest defraggers out
there - much faster than most of the competition. But then I usually
defrag my drives daily, so they never get too fragmented anyway...
-
Seems like it does not fix problems. Running chkdsk right after verifying still turns up errors.
...that will probably be because you can't correct errors on the boot drive (Windows volume)
when windows is running.
If you try "chkdsk -F" on your boot drive, Windows will not let you do it directly,
but complain...
Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use byprocess. Would you like to schedule this volumechecked the next time the system restarts? (Y/N)No doubt Defraggler can't do this either, for obvious reasons.
Normally, you should have a "clean" disk (if your machine hasn't been crashing
and you shut it down properly, so errors in the filing system should be fairly
rare. So using Defraggler to effect a quick check is convenient. If Defraggler
reports errors, then run chkdsk with the -F option and type Y to schedule
a chkdsk -F on startup, then reboot and wait. It shouldn't take more than a
few minutes to fix things up, mind you, chkdsk isn't perfect !
-
Where are the Defraggler logs stored by default? I love this program, other than the logs it generates...takes up huge space on my hard drive, and I want to find these logs so I can delete them.
Thanks in advance.
...I don't believe that Defraggler does produce a log...unless you explicitly
invoke in debug mode, whereupon it will produce a log in the same folder
as the executable. See the following topic...
http://forum.piriform.com/index.php?showtopic=12840
If you don't kow where the logs are, why do you think Defraggler is
producing them ?
Just to check, I've run Defraggler and then reindexed all my disks
and sorted a listing by date: I could find no trace of a log file or text
file pertaining to Defraggler [loads of Widows logs etc, though !].
-thm
-
RE: Analysis after Defrag not working correctly
...Ah...I think I am onto something...
I've done some further tests, using Dave Whitney's defrag utility at...
http://www.flexomizer.com/PermaLink,guid,c...2145cc1957.aspx
...as this has the capability to *fragment* files - good for subsequently testing defraggers !
Anyway, what I've found is that if I *deselect* the files in the list after a Defrag then a
subsequent Analyse run will consistently [and correctly] report that there are no defragmented
files.
Hope this provides a pointer to the source of the problem !
-thm
PS. to generate fragments in a test folder, use Whitney's defrag tool like this:-
wdefrag -s -b d:\testfolder\*.*
...sad to say this hasn't turned out to be totally reliable either: even if I do deselect the
files in a list after a Defrag, a subsequent Analysis sometimes still erroneously
reports files as fragmented when they aren't.
-thm
-
RE: Analysis after Defrag not working correctly
...Ah...I think I am onto something...
I've done some further tests, using Dave Whitney's defrag utility at...
http://www.flexomizer.com/PermaLink,guid,c...2145cc1957.aspx
...as this has the capability to *fragment* files - good for subsequently testing defraggers !
Anyway, what I've found is that if I *deselect* the files in the list after a Defrag then a
subsequent Analyse run will consistently [and correctly] report that there are no defragmented
files.
Hope this provides a pointer to the source of the problem !
-thm
PS. to generate fragments in a test folder, use Whitney's defrag tool like this:-
wdefrag -s -b d:\testfolder\*.*
-
Uh?..Ive never seen Defraggler after right-clicking on a drive...Am i missing something here?
...Ah...perhaps I wasn't very clear: you need to right-click on the drive's
name in the Defraggler window to get to this context menu.
The attached screenshot should make this unambiguous...
-thm
-
Can you give us some examples of this, e.g. what the files are?
MrRon
Actually, something has just dawned on me
...I bet that all the files in questionwere browser cache files, and the problem is that the browser is write-locking
them. I've tried the same exercise a few times but quitting the browser before
trying to effect a defrag, without problems. I shall investigate further...
-thm
[Edit]
...Nope that was too simple an answer: I'm still getting the same
effect [defragged files showing as fragmented after an Analyse]
even on some simple log files that I know are closed (coz I know
the application that generates them !).
-
Can you give us some examples of this, e.g. what the files are?
MrRon
Well, the files are just ordinary ones. Nothing special that I can see.
For example, the easiest way of getting fragmented files on the boot
drive is to browse the 'net for a minute or two. I did this, and then ran
up Defraggler under debug and did the following...
1) Analyse C: - loads of files shown as fragmented
2) Selected all files & defragmented C: (via Defrag button)
- all files then showed as defragmented (i.e. just 1 fragment).
3) Re-ran Analyse on C: - Now all files showed as fragmented again !
4) Re-ran Analyse on C: again...now all files shown as defragmented.
I've edited the log file to show these phases, and have attached it to this post
I've also captured a screenshot of Defraggler taken at stage 3, which lists
some of these files.
-thm
Defraggler.exe._1_1_50__2008_01_24_16_15_.txt
-
One bug report to kick off the topic...
Version:
Defraggler 1.1.44 and 1.1.50
Bug severity:
Low (but but a little irritating)
Bug description:
Sometimes after effecting a defrag (via "defrag" button), I re-analyse
the relevant drive to see whether all files have indeed been defragmented.
Frequently Defraggler then reports all of the files I've just defragmented
as still fragmented, but if I re-run the analysis a few times it usually gets
it right and reports "This drive contains no fragmented files" (as expected).
Alternatively, just quitting and rerunning Defraggler [and then the analysis]
works correctly every time.
As indicated above, this is of no real consequence, but it is just a little irritating !
-thm
PS. Thanks for an excellent defragger, though !!!
-
Further to my earlier post (of a few minutes ago), here is another
suggestion as a possible alternative...
1) Leave the "Defrag" button as it is, but...
2) Change the right-click context menu on a drive to replace the current
"Defrag Drive" [which currently defrags files and freespace] with
three entries: "Defrag Files" [which would just do all the files],
"Defrag Freespace" [which would just compact the freespace], and
"Defrag Files + Freespace"
Would this be a better suggestion to my previous one ??
-thm
-
Here is a very simple [but hopefully useful suggestion]...
It would be good to have two Defrag buttons, for example
"Defrag Selected"
"Defrag All Files"
...the "Defrag Selected" button would act as the "Defrag" button
does now, but the "Defrag All Files" button would effectively
select all files and launch a defrag in one click. Call me lazy,
but after effecting an analysis I would prefer not to have to
go over to select all files and then back to the existing Defrag button.
Maybe an even simpler thing to do would be to select all fragmented
files by default after an analysis. After all, if you don't want to do this
you would have to click around on those files that you do want to defrag,
(so one more click to deselect the "all" box wouldn't make much difference)
but it would make things a bit slicker for those that usually want to defrag
them all !
Opinions ??
-thm
-
Do any commercial apps do this?? I haven't heard of Microsoft's or JKDefrag being able to do either for that matter.
AJ
...and mst Defrag can do them concurrently...
- thm
-
I finally got rid of the massive file by coping the contents of the partition to my external hard drive and reformatting the partition. I'm curious if anyone has any idea how the file was made, and if the newest version will still make it. I'm not willing to test it myself because of how hard and long it takes to get rid of the file.
Jim: the System Volume Information folder is used by System Restore to
put "restore points" in - see the following links...
http://www.theeldergeek.com/system_volume_...ion_folder1.htm
http://www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/2007/1...n-xp-and-vista/
You can reduce the size of this folder by reducing the amount of
space allocated for system restore points on that drive (or turning it off).
Look at My Computer/Properties/System Restore, then select the drive
and click on Settings.
BTW, I wouldn't recommend turning off System Restore on your boot drive !!!
- thm
-
Another option that would be useful would be to bring all the free space together into one block after the files have been defragmented (Windows defrag calls it "compacting"). Otherwise, if you are short on free space and that free space is itself fragmented, then the next time you create a largish file, it will be fragmented right from the start.
Thanks
Stuart
--I think you will find that if you defrag the drive (right-click on drive name)
then Defraggler will attempt to defrag the freespace after it has defragged
the files. It's not perfect and sometimes takes a couple of goes, but it is
reasonably effective and a good compromise between speed and completeness.
- thm
]
...I bet that all the files in question
Feedback on Defraggler v1.02.077
in Defraggler
Posted
I'm unconvinced by the new tabbed UI: it typically means more clicks
to do the defragging.
The "Defrag" button now appears to do a full disk defrag, i.e. files, folders
and freespace. This is only needed occasionally. In previous versions
this would just defrag the selected files, so for a quick defrag, could just
click Analyze, then select all files and click Defrag.
Now, with the new version, to do the same thing you have to click Analyze,
then View Files, then select all files, then remember to right click to get the
context menu and then scroll down to Defrag Checked and left-click on that.
Not that that is difficult, but I don't think it is particularly obvious and could
put off some newcomers to the program (they may not find out how to do it).
Now, not everyone wants to look at the list of fragmented files anyway, so
how about the following compromise between the old UI and the new...
Having the tabbed UI means more space on the "Drive" tab in which extra
buttons could be placed.
So...how about slimming down the height of the Status and Properties groups
and adding buttons at the bottom of the Drive tab to the right of the Analyze
button something like this...
-------------------- Defrag Options -------------------------
[Just Files] [Files+Folders] [Free space] [Entire Drive]
...The Files button would defrag all the files found in a previous Analyze run
(or if none done, then would effect an analysis first). Similarly for the Files+Folders
button, except that folders too would be included.
This would mean that most users could choose exactly what type of defrag
they wanted very quickly and easily (and obviously).
For those relatively rare occasions when one only wants to defrag certain files,
one could just do the Analyze, then click View Files, select the target files and
use the context menu to defrag those selected. This is an excellent feature of
Defraggler, it's just that [iMHO] it is less likely to be used than the other options
- particularly the first two (Files, Files+Folders)
What does the forum think of that ?
It's good that Defraggler now persists the window properties (size, position etc)
- could the "Priority" option be persisted also, perhaps ?