I downloaded the new version today 2.01.239. After it completed defragging, it said that it had Zero fragmented files. Yet I saw 5 individual Blue Blocks. It's possible those are single files so I clicked them one at a time to see what was in them.
2 of the 5 Blue Blocks don't show any files, just a pop up tip that says "No files are in the block."
Well, if the block is empty, then why is it blue? Picture attached.
My \C drive has over a hundred of these "no file in block" blocks (hereafter reffered to as ghost blocks). Ghost blocks seem to be keeping me from writing large files to the drive without chopping them up into several fragments. (which isn't really a big deal, but it's annoying ) ghost blocks do not respond to "defrag freespace". Are these ghost blocks truly empty? Will my computer write over them without any issues? Or are they impacting my drive's writing performance? Most importantly, are they impacting Defraggler's performance?
Also, does Defraggler know that these blocks are actually empty? Will it write over them during "defrag drive"?
Example: If I told defraggler to "move large files to end of drive" and there were several of these ghost blocks at short intervals near the very end of the drive, and Defraggler first moved and a very large file to the end of the drive, would Defraggler actually report that very large file (say, about 2GB) was fragmented over those ghost blocks? My question really is: Is Defraggler imagining these blue ghost blocks and making it's own job exceedingly more difficult?
UPDATE: The number of ghost blocks on my C\ drive have increased dramatically! Very bad news. I still don't know for sure if these blocks fragmaent larger files, but they're sticking to my drive and it's starting to become a problem. Now there are blocks that are colored solid dark blue (denoting not fragmented full occupancy) that have "no files in block. Many of these blocks are obiously afterimages of previously moved files. I'm starting to get worried about the health of my drive. I literally have hundreds of these ghost blocks on my C: drive now
When I used WINDOWS(XP SP3 version)Defragmenter, the ghost blocks were removed, almost all of them. The afterimage of one large file still remained, but I can live with that.
Used WINDOWS Defragmenter in Computer Management to get rid of most (if not all) of these pesky blocks.
most of the empty blue blocks are occupied by internal NTFS metafiles. Defraggler cannot do anything useful with them, so they are excluded from the analysis data as their names are very confusing for the non-technical users.
most of the empty blue blocks are occupied by internal NTFS metafiles. Defraggler cannot do anything useful with them, so they are excluded from the analysis data as their names are very confusing for the non-technical users.
Best regards
Romanoff
I would think that NOT having names would be even MORE confusing. Because at least when it shows the names, people KNOW there is something there. When nothing shows, it makes them so confused about "ghost" blocks!
I would think that NOT having names would be even MORE confusing. Because at least when it shows the names, people KNOW there is something there. When nothing shows, it makes them so confused about "ghost" blocks!
I completely agree with Super Fast. When navigating any Windows system folders (idk why anyone would want to, but it happens), seeing a file that you can't interact with and that has a funny name is a common occurance. However, seeing a file without a name, properties, or purpose causes a 'WTF?' reaction. These ghost blocks should list the names of the files within them and identify them as metafiles so that we can know that they are functioning and not a 'WTF?' type of glitch. I can see how not identifying them could safeguard against novice users attepting to edit these files and causing system instability, but labeling them as metafiles would tell everyone that they can't be moved or edited.
I'm not entirely convinced that romanoff's explanation is necessarily addressed to this specific problem though. $MFT and $User.Dat are displayed in Defraggler along with other non-defragglerable files, so how are these other metafiles special by being "not in the block"?