Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums


Experienced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Stokesson

  • Rank
  1. I just installed the latest update of CCleaner and it shut down while cleaning, further tests revealed that it was only when cleaning Firefox and Kaspersky AV was running, so I am guessing that Kaspersky is to blame, but there was no log of the event. I am still running Windows 10 pro 1511.
  2. I have been using CCleaner in scripts for several years to empty all the temporary files before a backup. However since I upgraded from XP to Windows 10 I find CCleaner is returning the 0 completion code immediately rather than when the program closes and so I cannot wait for cleaning completion. So could there be a command line variant of AUTO or AUTORB which does not return a status until the program closes? In a batch file "Start /Wait CCleaner.exe /AUTO" would then work. Or if I use a command window running CCleaner will not give me another prompt until it finishes. My mai
  3. I am using CCleaner within another application (std or 64 bit has the same error) and the "completed OK" status is returned on loading rather than on completion. Command line "C:\Program Files\CCleaner\CCleaner.exe" /auto I have been using CCleaner with SyncBackFree for several years in the run before mode where CCleaner cleans out temp files and caches before backing up the User files, however recently I noticed that the backup had started before CCleaner had finished. I didn't notice how many udates ago this happened. Using their "test" button CCleaner gives an OK response as th
  4. The direct answer is that on a good hard disk with large buffer and seek optimisation, the 4 tasks in parallel should complete in less time than the 4 tasks in series. It is no different than any multitasking use of the drive. However see below for what I actually meant to say. P.S. I have run multiple parallel defrags on a single hard disk, though I cannot remember which product allowed it, it was a trial and for other reasons I didn't buy it. As the feature is still not in 1.18.185 I will add. OOPS! Sorry I thought it was obvious that what I meant is what is in most of the commerc
  5. I am starting this as a new thread because although all the aspects are reported elsewhere my input does not appear to sit well in any other thread. Also it will be a long post. I hope that it proves of some use in solving the slow down mystery. I have just upgraded to 1.18.185 from a 1.16 version downloaded just under 4 months ago. When I used this version it defragmented in a time that I considered quite fast for the size of disk, file structure and amount of defragmentation. I have been using various defrag routines for about 25 years and have some "feel" for what is working well.
  6. Just a note to add. SSD's do not have heads, they are truly near instant random access (similar to RAM or ROM) and so do not need defragging to get "physical" performance improvements. Writing to them uses "Life" so avoiding unnecessary writes is important - another reason not to defrag. There is theoretically, depending upon the file system, reduced performance due to fragmentation - e.g. FAT or FAT32 but considerably less so if NTFS or one of the Linux EXT formats is used. However to save the tiny delay which would normally be << 1% (considerably less than) would require knowled
  7. I have just updated to the latest version 1.18.185 and noticed that at the end of defragging the disk map is BOGUS. Just Analyse again and the true status is revealed, all the Red disappears!! This is one of two bugs I have noticed so far. I am running on Windows 7 and XP, the XP defrag routine also has this bug where an analyse step is required to get a correct picture. The Windows 7 program doesn't even show a map.
  8. Hi. This is an interesting topic. Unfortunately I do not have an answer about Defraggler, but a few thoughts which may help the discussion along. Though I have seen the odd "Shut down when complete" tick box, maybe only in the scheduler. In XP and earlier sleep is purely determined from an activity level:- Primary activity - user input, mouse or keyboard etc. - restarts any timers Background activity - CPU usage may determine trigger point, i.e. less than 10% means inactive. Individual program may request sleep, power off etc. and seem to be obeyed even if another task is running.
  9. This is a feature request (Unless of course there is already a way of achieving it that searching the help hasn't found). After using CCleaner for several years I tentatively tried Defraggler on secondary machine (just in case) before moving to my main machine which still on XP and newly re-installed desperately needed de-fragmenting (the inbuilt defrag is so poor). However my 200 GB drive is split into 5 partitions and Defraggler has no way yet to run the GUI on multiple partitions. The suggestion in the post "leave Defraggler de-fragmenting 4 partitions when I am sleeping" is exact
  10. You are not showing "Tasks from all Users". The scheduled Defraggler task DF.EXE is run by SYSTEM and only shows after clicking the "All users". The Defraggler Gui will not run while the scheduled task is running. This point is the subject of a post that I am in the process of editing "Obtaining status of scheduled or background Defraggler tasks". Regards Stokersson
  11. I agree with the suggestion and had the same problem to solve. My solution however was to set up 4 scheduled tasks to start at 1 hour intervals to run once only. The tasks have to be in the future AND Defraggler must not be running, so I started the first ten minutes later to give time to set up all four and exit. What happened was that Defraggler started all four tasks and now 30 hours later only 1 is still running - that is the subject of another question which if I cannot find another post I will be posting (Obtaining status of scheduled or background Defraggler tasks).
  • Create New...