eL_PuSHeR

I think you are right. Having the MFT fragmented in a few big chunks won't probably affect performance that much.

Are you using Windows XP? Some Opera folders must reside still under Documents and settings. They don't get deleted because it's user config. Backup and delete them. Then, I guess CC won't detect Opera anymore.

You will have to delete some files to make some room. Your drive is filled to the rim. You need some free space to defragment.

Hello. Using v.1.20 under WinXP. I used the defrag freespace on an already defragmented partition and, after finishing, Defraggler fragmented four files which were not fragmented before. Then I notice no difference for using the Defrag Freespace allowing fragmentation. Both free space options create further fragmentation. I think the Free Space defrag should leave gaps opened but it shouldn't create new fragments.

I have been able to defrag some critical filesystem data (as the MFT) by running Defraggler from a boot CD.

What Operating System are you using? Do you have everything up to date? Tried chkdsk before defragging? Just a few shots in the dark.

Too bad. I liked that "bug". I have posted about it on another thread.

I am testing Defraggler thoroughly and I have found that the "Defrag option" isn't that much useable with large partitions (for partitions bigger that 30Gb in size or so). That's because the method used is PAINFULLY SLOW, specially when there are lots of small files. I don't know the algorithm involved here but it tends to move a lot of already defragged data all around the disk adding a lot of time before completing the operation. I do not want to start a flame war but even WinXP built-in defragmenter does a better job in filling gaps (in less time). Any ideas?. Defraggler is a good product but I think I will be using the "Quick defrag" option only for now. No reason for spending several hours to fill up some gaps in an already defragmented 300Gb partition. I don't care if there are some gaps left. Keep up the good work. What I really like about Defraggler is that is free and that it isn't clog your system with unneeded s**t. Piriform programmers deserve some big praise. EDIT: I right-clicked on a drive letter and found two advanced options from defragging free space. That's what I wanted! (and I have missed them). Doing a Quick Defrag+Defrag freespace allowing fragmentation is very fast and quite effective. Another reason for not understanding the need for a full "defrag" option. What are its benefits?

I think it would be nice to show some MFT information after analysing a drive, even if MFT cannot be defragmented normally. What do you think? I am using v.1.20 under WinXP, by the way.

Hello. I have downloaded version 1.20 today. By reading the changelog I have known that Defraggler won't move files inside the MFTZone anymore. I would like this to be optional. Moving files inside the MFT Zone proved quite useful to me, to force relocation of said MFTZone. I tend to pad my MTF so there is always 25-50% free space, so it doesn't get fragmented easily. This is the batch file I use for padding MFT: (Copied from somewhere else). Would it be possible for future versions to include an option to write into MFTZone. Is it really that dangerous to do so?

Hello. I like defraggler a lot. I am using latest version 1.19 on WinXP. However it would be nice if Piriform would add/change some new defragmentation methods, such as: 1.- Quick defrag. Same as it is now. Just tries to defrag fragmented files without doing anything else. 2.- Normal defrag. Same as Quick but it also tries to fill gaps but without putting too much emphasis either, leaving some gaps if necessary to shorten up process time. (Loose packing) 3.- Thorough defrag. This would be as the regular "defrag drive". It puts the most emphasis on filling gaps even if it has to move around almost every file on the partition (tight packing). What do you think?

Try to do a SRP before defragging and then use the windows cleanup utility to clean up everything but the latest SRP. Your fragmentation level should decrease.

As someone already suggested, get the slim version from Piriform if you are that annoyed.

Maybe a minor redraw issue. What I have seen is that Defraggler 1.19 says 100% complete and it's still moving some blocks on the GUI.

If you delete those, you cannot uninstall windows update critical updates anymore. I do DELETE THEM too, after a little testing.

I use eruNT on a regular basis so I have backups of registry. I also back up entire partition every 10 days or so. But I agree that it's a safe measure to backup entries before deleting/cleaning them. I have System Restore totally disabled so invoking it before cleaning would be useless for me, although it's not a bad idea at all.

I disagree about always making a backup. I have never experienced problems using Crap Cleaner registry cleaner. OTOH, a warning saying "for advanced users" sounds cool.

Windows XP SP3 being slower/worse than SP2 is a MYTH. Get over it. And having an outdated system is a bad idea too.

Look at the various portable and U3 versions HERE.

I take registry defrag != registry packing right? I mean. Packing the registry using the eruNT tool is also a waste of time? If you mean physically defragging registry hives on disk, you should post in the defraggler section instead.

Click on HELP -> About and post your version here. If someone demanded you to pay you have been scammed.

Well I hope this is my last update for now: This issue is the same when fragmentation = 0% and the file list is empty. It's the "filling gaps" phase that is slow as hell.

I don't know if Defraggler would move them. But there are not fragmented. EDIT: I have checked the file list and there are only about 130 files there. Not a big deal for taking so much time. I will keep using Windows Defrag which performs ok for me until this issues are sorted out. Followup: I don't know what placement algorithm Defraggler uses but it seems that almost every file on the partition is moved up and down when full defragmentation is selected. When filling gaps it would be wise to fill up the first gaps choosing blocks at the end of the disk. Otherwise you move the same clusters over and over again on subsequent deframentation passes. At least this approach should be an option under configuration.

Hello. I am posting in this section because I am not sure whether this is a bug or not. I am running Defraggler 1.19.192 under Windows XP SP3 and I have noticed that while Defraggler starts at a very good pace using the DEFRAGMENTATION option (not the QUICK one) it slows down to a crawl after 25% defragmented for my E: 100GB NTFS partition (it is a games only partition - with many small files like the ones from Steam), which isn't that much fragmented. It seems that it's moving some small files to fill gaps but I do not know why it's doing it at snail speeds. No wonder it is going to take a few hours to defragment an almost already defragmented partition. I have attached a screenshot detailing the zone where Defraggler is slowing down, highlighted green. Also chkdsk reports: 104856220 KB total disk space. 61166608 KB in 84949 files. 29968 KB in 1995 indexes. 0 KB in bad clusters. 184500 KB in use by the system. Best regards.

Why do you want to clear Firefox cache with CC when Firefox is running?