Can't get back to the application window

Defraggler Defraggler Bug Reporting
1

I switched to a different user account (didn't log off) in Win7 while Defraggler was running. When I went back to the account where Defraggler is running, the application window was closed. When I try to repopen it, either from the Task Bar icon or the Start Menu icon, I get the message: "Defraggler is already running" in a dialog titled, "Piriform Defraggler." There is no way to reopen the Defraggler window. I even checked the notification area, hoping that Defraggler was minimized there - no such luck, either in the shown or the hidden icon area!

When I go into task manager, Defraggler is not listed among the running Applications but it does appear, as defraggler64.exe in the Processes tab list, and shows a CPU usage that fluctuates between 25 and 24.

Does anyone know how and why this is happening? This is not a one-time partial system crash. This has happened to me several times over the past few days.

Is there any way that I can reopen the Application window to see how the defrag is progressing without having to close down the process and then reopen it, which I don't want to do since stopping and restarting the defrag process might adversely affect it? Thanks.

2

. . . stopping and restarting the defrag process might adversely affect it?

Stopping Defraggler will not hurt anything. What was defragged will remain defragged. Restart Defraggler to continue defragging.

3

I was concerned about stopping in the middle because in a reply to a Google search hit about 'less space after defrag' asked the questioner if they stopped in the middle of a defrag and started again. You are telling me that this would not cause that. Thanks kroozer for the very fast reply.

I did stop and start again a defrag of my very large drive yesterday. The operation takes over 8 hours to complete and my restart seemed to cause Defraggler to start over again, slowly re-processing the files it already defragged.

I have not been able to find another person having this problem. Have you heard of it? Do you think it is a bug in the program or in my OS that is causing this?

4

It's not a bug. Defraggler must first analyze again to see what's fragged -- then it resumes defragging where it left off.

Eight hours is too long, and very taxing on your drive. I run only a file defrag -- it's sohhhh fast.

Tick ☑ Filename WsbsOgA.png and click Defrag Checked.

Afterwards defrag the PagingFile by running a Boot Time Defrag . . SrvJO9p.png

5

Thanks again for the additional welcome suggestions. I am defragging a 3 TB external drive that is packed with media files. When I compacted files, and then folders, I did save significant space but the Microsoft compacting engine threw fragments of all my files all over the disc. So I decided to move about 1/3 of them and then defrag first the files and then the free space (not allowing fragmentation) so that when I compact the drive itself and then move the folders, one at a time, back to the drive, they will be both compacted and continuous (not fragmented). This will recover significant real estate if, as hoped, it will be successful. Partial tests of this strategy have worked.

You have been a great help.

6

So I decided to move about 1/3 of them and then defrag first the files and then the free space (not allowing fragmentation) so that when I compact the drive itself and then move the folders, one at a time, back to the drive, they will be both compacted and continuous (not fragmented).

Have you any evidence or reason to support your theory ?

I have a totally different concept which you might like to test.

If you copy a set of files from one drive to another I predict that when you run defraggler ANALYZE,

you should find the quantity of detected fragments will differ between each original and its "duplicate".

Regardless of the number of fragments in the original,

Windows copy (move) to a different partition should automatically deliver each fragment in the correct sequence as a continuous stream of output data,

and this stream of data should be transferred into the destination free space.

If the destination free space is defragged BEFORE the transfer then the duplicated file should be fully defragged.

Regardless of whether :-

you defrag the destination free space on the intermediate drive before copying files ;

or simply copy them to fragmented destination free space and then defrag ;

or just copy them to fragmented destination free space and refrain from any defrag actions :-

when you copy the files back from the intermediate to the original drive

I predict the final output on the original drive will be perfectly defragged if you first defrag the free space on the original drive,

and just as bad as (or even worse) than before if you fail to defrag its free space.

I could of course be wrong - I have not tested this theory

I think my experience with Windows XP was that when it compacted a file it became much smaller and :-

its MD5 hash checksum was NOT changed ;

BUT if I copied that compacted file to another location the duplicate was automatically expanded back to the original un-compact size.

Your Mileage May Vary.

7

Thanks Alan_B.

Actually, I already found what you have said to be true. So, last night, I developed a different strategy that appears to be working. I am systematically moving all of my files that are already on my drive to the end of the drive. By doing a search of each folder, I can check, designating a move to the end of the drive, all of the contents of the folder. Sometimes I need to separately move a file in the folder with a different name. It is usually a very small file that is moved to the block nearest the end of drive that still has free space. This way, I am compacting all of my compressed files (the drive is compressed) using all available free space, maximizing the data that can be contained on the external drive. All files, so moved, are defragmented and the free spaces they are moved to seem to be defragmented, too.

When I have moved all of the files presently on the drive to the end, I will want new files I am moving to the drive to be compactly copied to the beginning of the drive. Here is my question:

  1. Should I defragment the free space (not allowing fragmentation option) before adding files to the beginning of the drive that has been cleared of all files by moving them to the end?
    1. In other words, after I have moved all existing files to the end, will the free space left behind, which was previously 'free space defragmented' now be fragmented again and in need of another defragmentation?
    2. Or will Defraggler automatically defragment the free space as the new files are added to the beginning of the drive?
  2. Even more important for me to know is, if I do defragment the free space, will Defraggler disturb, in any way, the files I have compactly moved to the end of the drive?
  3. Will it move any of those files away from the end of the drive or cause them to be fragmented or otherwise moved about?
8

I do not know exactly what, why, or how,

defraggler or any other such utility does its work.

By experimentation I have some understanding of both NTFS and FAT32 under Windows 7.

I believe that :-

There may be pockets of "free space sectors" between files, and each pocket is UN-fragmented;

When Windows copies a file it will allocate from the start of the "pocket of free space" that is nearest to "fast end" of the disc and is large enough to hold the file.

If Windows can use just one "pocket of free space" the new file will be UN-fragmented.

If more than one "pocket of free space" is needed to hold the file then the file is fragmented.

If you defrag free space, and if Piriform mean what I think they mean,

that should hopefully provide one large "pocket of free space",

and thereafter all new files will be UN-fragmented until either

All free space is used and no new files can be created,

OR,

some files get deleted creating new "pockets of free space", and only then (I think) would it be beneficial to again defrag free space.

I suggest you occasionally ANALYZE,

and only when the map shows that the remaining "pockets of free space" may become too small for your next copy do you need to defrag free space again.

My only concern is that I cannot understand why some people complain that they defrag files, and then defrag free space, and that fragments their files..

This however may be due to Windows permission adversely affecting manipulation of system files on C:\,

which should not be an issue with media files on an external drive.