Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

Defraggler: Willy2's bug reports


Willy2
 Share

Recommended Posts

I noticed that the developers of Defraggler (DF) are planning a new version of the program. Well, then they only have to read this thread to see all the things that can be improved/fixed. And as they can see, I have come across A LOT OF things that can be fixed and improved.

Some of the bugs in this thread are clear and obvious bugs that need to be fixed and can be (easily (??)) fixed. But other bugs don't show a reliable pattern of when and where these bugs are occurring. In those cases I think this "irregular" behaviour can be fixed by, what I would call, "better protecting the internal DF variables" and/or improving the memorymanagement.

If I was asked to give a list of the fixes/improvements that have for me the highest priority then it would look like this:

1) Fix the multiple issues/bugs in the "Move files to end of drive" options which prevents the program from properly moving the all right files. See the 2 red arrows in the 1st picture.
2) Improve the "move to the end of drive" subroutines. In the 2nd picture I have an example. Here DF moved a number of files (blue boxes + red arrows) to the end of the drive. But after moving the files there are still (large) gaps (black line & black arrow).
3) Improve the "display blocks" routines. When I click on every empty box between 2 groups of blue boxes (above the black line) then DF reported that there were still some 4 or 5 files in that gap (above black line) but not all these files showed up in the file map between the files.
4) (Sharply) Reduce the time the program needs to stop. The user can decide to interrupt the program when the program is performing some operation (e.g. moving files to the end of a drive). But then it can take a LONG LONG time (up to 5 (10 ??) minutes !!) before the DF program code has really finished "stopping". The sign that DF is still (very) "busy" doing something mysterious, is the (very) high CPU as shown in Task Manager. And when I am really fed up, I simply use Task Manager to abort the DF process.

Screenshot_25.png

Defraggler1.png

System setup: http://speccy.piriform.com/results/gcNzIPEjEb0B2khOOBVCHPc

 

A discussion always stimulates the braincells !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

- Have run Defraggler to move a bunch of files towards the end of the C: drive. I was astonished to see that, after having finished the job, the program kept running with a very high CPU for about 50 (!!!!) minutes. I know that it can take DF a considerable amount of time to "wind down" but ~ 50 minutes is ridiculous, outrageous.

System setup: http://speccy.piriform.com/results/gcNzIPEjEb0B2khOOBVCHPc

 

A discussion always stimulates the braincells !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- I want to post a follow up on my post dated November 21, 2020.

- It seems - I repeat - SEEMS (!!!) that when the user sorts the search results on "Fragments" that then the program code acts as if the user want to sort the search results on "Last Modified". In this regard "Fragments" doesn't sort on "fragments" at all !!!

- The program code could contain a "Sort on fragments" sub-routine but then it seems this "sort on fragments" program code isn't used at all.

- The good folks at CCleaner should examine the "Sort on Fragments" program code in detail to see what's REALLY going on when the user want to sort the search result on "fragments". I can't make head or tails of it. But it simply doesn't work.

System setup: http://speccy.piriform.com/results/gcNzIPEjEb0B2khOOBVCHPc

 

A discussion always stimulates the braincells !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Another follow up for the post of november 21, 2020:

Now I have a better description of when the "Sort Fragments" bug shows up.

- After the "Search" feature has produced a list with files that match a certain pattern, the user is able to sort the list on 6 criteria / benchmarks (Filename, fragments, size, type, last modified OR Path). The user can choose to sort the information multiple times on different benchmarks / criteria and as many times as the user wants to. Up to this point the sorting program code ALWAYS seem (!!!) to work.

- But the "Sort Fragments" bug shows up as soon as the user has defragmented a number of files or has reduced the fragmentation of a number of files. Let's assume that out of a list of say 40 files the user has defragmented say 4 files or has reduced the fragmentation of 4 files. Then when the user wants to sort the list on "Fragments" these 4 files remain "stuck" in their place in the "Fragments" list when the user sorts the list on "Fragments".

- The solution for this bug is/could be actually surprisingly simple. Because the "Sort Fragments" subroutine(s) in the "File list" tab simply ALWAYS work(s). Just do a simple "Copy & Paste" of the program code. Or perhaps the program uses the same "Sort Fragments" subroutine(s) but with some (slightly) different entry parameters ? Perhaps then a (small ??) change of the entry parameters could do the trick to fix this bug.

System setup: http://speccy.piriform.com/results/gcNzIPEjEb0B2khOOBVCHPc

 

A discussion always stimulates the braincells !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- There are users who have complained that for Defraggler (& Recuva & Speccy) there weren't any new updates issued for a while. I am also one of those users who would love to see a new version of Defraggler with all the bugs/"Weak spots" fixed.

- I understand that some programs of CCleaner have (top) priority when it comes to issueing new (updated) versions. Like CCleaner. And that's quite understandable because programs like MS Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox and MS Onedrive are updated on a regular basis (say every 3 or 4 weeks). And that could mean that the program code of CCleaner also needs to be updated with top priority.

- But then programs like Speccy, Recuva & Defraggler don't receive too much attention when it comes to updating the programs. (Yes, I know that right now the developers of CCleaner are planning for new updates for 2 of these programs) That's why I would suggest / propose the following update policy for these 3 programs:

1) Collect all the suggestions & bug reports for these 3 programs.

2) If there is a need to issue an "Emergency update" then do so. E.g. when Microsoft issues a version of its "NET Framework" then SPECCY should be updated ASAP.

3) Dedicate one week each year to Defraggler, Speccy & Recuva. E.g a week per year for each program. Take all the reported bugs & suggestions and fix those bugs/implement the code changes for those 3 programs in those "dedicated weeks". If there are no bugs to be fixed in one program then that week can be used for something else.

System setup: http://speccy.piriform.com/results/gcNzIPEjEb0B2khOOBVCHPc

 

A discussion always stimulates the braincells !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.