Defraggler - Shunting

[smcpoland]

Hi,

 

Windows 7 64 bit fully patched, situation on 1.5TB drive (raid) 400GB used.

 

Ok I defragged the drive once, noticed a lot of chrome temp files so ran ccleaner and defragged again.

 

what I noticed was that once Defraggler got to the JPG and other image files it basically shunted approx 75GB of images from block x+1 to block x.

 

While this is extreme notation Defraggler took over 2 hours to shunt all these files for no-good reason as (using the legend) they were already def'ed.

 

Now, I like the maths behind defragging - it can be considered quite amazing and I acknowledge the difficulty in designing an algorithm that works in every case, but "there has to be a better way", Frankie goes to Hollywood, Warriors of the Wasteland, approx 1984, I digress.

 

I think there has to be a situation where Defraggler has to recognize the possibility of "Shunting" especially of large lumps of defragged used blocks, and allow say 95% block usage prior to large area the Shunt area rather than just filling it up by shunting. Does that make sense? Or filling in from the end of the drive rather than from the front when a possible shunt area is recognized, that is move from the end of the drive inwards, of course only if the data fits.

 

I hope that makes sense. Anyway love the product, better than most. Could be a world beater though.

 

regards

Sean

[bailout00]

I have to second this, however I do see the logic behind it. Eventually, old files will end up in the beginning of the drive, and won't have to be touched... at least thats my theory.

[mr don]

Hi,

 

Windows 7 64 bit fully patched, situation on 1.5TB drive (raid) 400GB used.

 

Ok I defragged the drive once, noticed a lot of chrome temp files so ran ccleaner and defragged again.

 

what I noticed was that once Defraggler got to the JPG and other image files it basically shunted approx 75GB of images from block x+1 to block x.

 

While this is extreme notation Defraggler took over 2 hours to shunt all these files for no-good reason as (using the legend) they were already def'ed.

 

Now, I like the maths behind defragging - it can be considered quite amazing and I acknowledge the difficulty in designing an algorithm that works in every case, but "there has to be a better way", Frankie goes to Hollywood, Warriors of the Wasteland, approx 1984, I digress.

 

I think there has to be a situation where Defraggler has to recognize the possibility of "Shunting" especially of large lumps of defragged used blocks, and allow say 95% block usage prior to large area the Shunt area rather than just filling it up by shunting. Does that make sense? Or filling in from the end of the drive rather than from the front when a possible shunt area is recognized, that is move from the end of the drive inwards, of course only if the data fits.

 

I hope that makes sense. Anyway love the product, better than most. Could be a world beater though.

 

regards

Sean

 

I would second this idea.

 

BUT! A much better idea is to either partition your drive off using W7 disk manager into 2 partitions, then move your pics to a Pictures folder, vids to a Video folder etc, OR, just use an external drive to put them on.

 

Now, before people here say, hey, but making a folder is the same thing as making a partition, only you don't have to do as much work, NO IT IS NOT!

 

You can do things with a second partition that you cannot with a folder. A partition is treated as a separate drive, a folder is not. Therefore, if partition C gets hit by a virus, in most cases, D is unaffected. So you can format C, or fix C, then D is still untouched!

 

Additionally, putting all those files on a second partition will prevent Defraggler, Antivirus apps, Anti-malware apps, & other tools from having to defrag through & search through tons of files.

 

It will drastically speed up the search/scan/repair times. If I were you, I would partition your drive, & dump the 75 GB pics into a folder you create called Pictures. Do the same for other large folders you have. Save enough room on the partition for all the files you plan to move.

 

This will make the things you do on C much faster, reduce wear, extend the life of the drive, reduce the chance of malware/virus corruption of your files!

 

Even faster still, is simply moving it all to an external drive that you only use when needed!

[smcpoland]

BUT! A much better idea is to either partition your drive off using W7 disk manager into 2 partitions, then move your pics to a Pictures folder, vids to a Video folder etc, OR, just use an external drive to put them on.

 

This is definitely thinking out of the box and may indeed help a lot of people. However, it will not work for everyone. For example I only state one of my drives,the 1.5TB Raid drive. What I don't tell you is I already have over 8TB on my machine with 13 of the possible 26 partitions already used. Your solution assumes a novice user who generally has one or two drives and limited requirements.

 

I run up to 4 VMs at a time (including the base OS that's 5) (yes it is one Mother Freak of a machine). I have all my music and Video already on separate drives etc. Pictures not, however.

 

Your idea is not without merit, but shunting has been along ever since defragging started. It would be good to recognize it and do something about it, and you confirm it in you very first statement

I would second this idea.

 

regards