John Gray

Intriguingly, I have exactly the same problem - but with acres of small files! The display can show 100% complete with no more files to fragment, and still the display of the current file at the bottom changes every second or so displaying what seems to be hundreds, perhaps thousands, of different small files. This process can go on for a few hours, before, suddenly, the defrag completes.

I agree entirely!

Not in v1.14 - but this change should be pretty simple, surely?

In fact the Toolbar build is about three times the size of the ones without the toolbar! That's why people check out the Builds page for CCleaner, and choose the 'slim' build. As from v1.14 we will have to do the same for Defraggler...

On that basis he might just as well back everything up, reformat his hard disk and reinstall the operating system!

It would be helpful if the defragmentation percent messages from the command-line DF could have a hh:mm:ss timestamp preceding each! Thanks.

Try Mark Russinovich's PageDefrag.

Defraggler seems to do a good job of handling large files. But when it has to deal with large numbers of small files, the run times for a defragment operation can go into hours, and even days. Could a better algorithm be devised to deal with this specific situation? It may help with the frequently-seen complaints that "Defraggler is too slow"... Thanks!

Have a look at Task Manager's Performance tab while running Defraggler, then at the Processes tab to see which task is using more than 50% of the CPU (even a powerful one). Then consider what might happen if more than one partition is being worked on simultaneously...

Command Line DF --------------------- Any chance of time-stamping the messages which get written to the console? Especially the "Defragmenting (nn%)" ones... Thanks!

An option I tried last night was to increase the size of my page file, which caused it to go into two fragments, then to run Mark Russinovich's PageDefrag and reboot. PageDefrag did what it said, but the single page file extent was arbitrarily placed. I don't see any good reason why the page file can't just be left in peace!

I'm not sure that "everyone knows" this - I could argue the exact opposite! If you have sufficient memory so that paging is (almost) unnecessary, it is best to put the page file as far out of the way as possible. Anyway, no program can move the page file when Windows is started; it has to be done very shortly after boot time. like CHKDSK of the Windows disk. ##### Adding all these additional and unrelated facilities (like messing with the registry) is just "feature creep", which in the case of Word means that many of the things it can do are not used nor wanted by 90% of the users... Please stick with defragmenting disks! There are other programs which do other things.

Oh PLEASE don't. Just leave the registry alone. Stick to hard disks! Read Ed Bott's old, but still mostly relevant, article on the subject...

A gain of 10% of what? In doing what?

I have a pair of 400 GB RAID-1 drives with XP Pro SP3, and as far as I am aware ordinary Windows programs have no idea whether disks are RAIDed or not! This is all handled transparently at a much lower level by the disk drivers. Certainly I've had no problem with any defrag program (the XP built-in Defrag, UltraDefrag, JKDefrag, Smart Defrag, Defraggler) which has anything to to with RAIDedness...

Sent, thanks!

Thank you! I can report that after 1? hours the screen suddenly started 'doing something', and after 2? hours (and 3,713 KB of log file) the defragment actually finished. At present I am doing an equivalently agonisingly lengthy CHKDSK, and it looks as thought it will need to continue to run overnight. I would however, be interested to know if what I experienced was SUPPOSED to happen that way - the proffered log file is still available (fortunately it ZIPs down to 363 KB)! Thanks PS I am right in thinking that MrRon is one of the Mysterons?!

Little of what I did may be relevant, but this is the sequence. I've used Defraggle 1.04 build 098 (GUI version) on two computers, on four drives, over the last couple of weeks. Very pleasing. I then installed 1.05 build 111 on both PCs today, and have defragged one drive on each PC successfully. On my external drive I then tried the command-line version of 1.05 (DF E:), and it gave all the expected messages up to the "Defragging 90% complete", and just stuck there. CPU usage was nearly 50% (i.e. 100% of one core), and the I/O Read and Write bytes were static. There was a continuous chuff-chuff-chuff noise from the hard disk (head movement) about twice a second, but nothing else happened for well over an hour, at which point I cancelled the Command Prompt window. I then ran the GUI version of 1.05 with /debug, and this again stopped at 90%, with an enormous list of files being displayed one at a time below the "Current State; total fragments 0" line. The debug log is over 2 MB so far after an hour, and there is a set of lines for each file culminating in the final part of the message line "The destination block is not free" (new file name, next block number in sequence from the previous). After another hour or so I will probably get bored and cancel the execution of Defraggler, and then run a CHKDSK on the drive. There doesn't seem much point posting 2MB of mostly repetitive log, but if a Mod would send me a PM I could attach it to a reply (I hope!). Any ideas what else I should do? Thanks!